The Grim Conclusions of the Largest-Ever Study of Fake News

Robinson Meyer
The Atlantic
Originally posted March 8, 2018

Here is an excerpt:

“It seems to be pretty clear [from our study] that false information outperforms true information,” said Soroush Vosoughi, a data scientist at MIT who has studied fake news since 2013 and who led this study. “And that is not just because of bots. It might have something to do with human nature.”

The study has already prompted alarm from social scientists. “We must redesign our information ecosystem for the 21st century,” write a group of 16 political scientists and legal scholars in an essay also published Thursday in Science. They call for a new drive of interdisciplinary research “to reduce the spread of fake news and to address the underlying pathologies it has revealed.”

“How can we create a news ecosystem … that values and promotes truth?” they ask.

The new study suggests that it will not be easy. Though Vosoughi and his colleagues only focus on Twitter—the study was conducted using exclusive data which the company made available to MIT—their work has implications for Facebook, YouTube, and every major social network. Any platform that regularly amplifies engaging or provocative content runs the risk of amplifying fake news along with it.

The article is here.

New Orleans psychologist sues over negative Angie's List comments

By Michelle Keahey
The Lousiana Record
Originally published May 28, 2012

A New Orleans psychologist has filed a lawsuit against a Florida doctor for negative comments posted on the website Angie's List.


John C. Courtney, Psy D., MP filed the lawsuit against Dr. Bartholomew Vereb and Angie's List Inc. on March 9 in federal court in New Orleans.
 
(cut)
 

Angie's List is accused of negligence for failing to follow its own procedures that would have prevented Courtney's damages, for breaching its duty to Courtney, and for acting with reckless disregard for the truth.

The entire story is here.

Thanks to Ken Pope for this information.

Plastic surgeon suing 10 patients for posting anonymous complaints online

The Palm Beach News

WFTV.com
Originally published May 23, 2012

An Orlando plastic surgeon has posted his explanation on the Internet as to why he's suing several of his patients.

WFTV learned Dr. Armando Soto is suing 10 patients who he said anonymously posted comments online about their bad experiences inside his office in the Dr. Phillip’s neighborhood.

The entire story is here.

Thanks to Ken Pope for the above link.

Dr. Soto's blog is here.

Here is a portion of his blog post.

"In sum, a previously unhappy patient is now on the road to a better outcome, with restoration of a healthier doctor/patient relationship. To us, that’s a great outcome."

Clinical Challenges in the Internet Era

By Glen O. Gabbard, M.D.
American Journal of Psychiatry

Here's a central passage from the initial case presentation:

[begin excerpt]

Much to the treatment team's surprise, within a week of Mr. R's first outpatient appointment, Mrs. R had begun posting disparaging comments on various web sites about the quality of her son's care, specifically naming the treating resident.

The comments described the treating resident as well as other members of the treatment team in derogatory terms. 

In addition, Mrs. R made comments that were vehemently antipsychiatry, including a statement that psychiatrists collude with pharmaceutical companies to generate profit rather than treat illness.

She posted multiple comments in the days following certain clinic visits; the comments could be found easily by anyone who did a Google search using the treating resident's name.

The comments initially appeared on both a personal blog and a highly popular web site, later cropping up also on web sites that serve as general forums for consumer dissatisfaction and on news outlets as user-generated content.

(cut) 

Two main concerns arose from the ensuing dialogue. Foremost was the potential for the mother's online comments to undermine Mr. R's care. For example, awareness of his mother's comments could exacerbate Mr. R's paranoia, leading to a disruption in his trusting relationship with the resident and a possible interference with his adherence to treatment. Moreover, the tone of the mother's comments suggested a fundamental disagreement with the treatment team's approach to her son's care, one that could potentially lead to an impasse. In the absence of a satisfactory working relationship with Mr. R's mother, the team would need to consider discharging him with a referral to another provider. Were they to do so, however, apart from feeling disappointed at not being able to continue providing Mr. R's care, the team would risk appearing either to be punishing him for his mother's actions or abandoning him for no clear reason. Either interpretation might fuel the paranoid perceptions he had regarding mental health care providers.

The second concern was that the mother's comments could damage the reputation of the treating resident. The resident initially did not think to be worried about his reputation, since he felt confident that he was well regarded by those who knew him and had observed his work with patients. Once this concern was raised, however, the resident thought of the potential impact the mother's public comments might have if he sought employment or further training outside his current institution. Given the fact that there is only limited public commentary concerning residents, a few negative Internet postings might adversely affect the opinions of potential patients, peers, or employers. Hence, the situation presented a quandary regarding how to respond to the comments posted online by Mr. R's mother while trying to avoid both potential harm to the patient and potential harm to the resident.

 (cut)

 Discussion: 

When I was asked to consult on this case, I felt a good deal of empathy for the resident.

Here he was, delivering good psychiatric care to a young man with severe illness, but receiving criticism rather than appreciation from the family. 

I recognized that there is now a public exposure inherent in psychiatric practice that can be daunting even to experienced clinicians but may be especially painful to vulnerable residents who are striving to become competent psychiatrists. 

[end excerpt]

Here's how the article ends:  

What can we do as a profession in the face of these challenges? The proliferation of Facebook, Internet forums, Twitter, blogs, and chat rooms is a juggernaut that cannot be stopped. We must live with these new intrusions into our professional lives and develop creative solutions. Institutions can develop policies so that ad hoc groups do not have to be assembled whenever delicate situations with potential liability arise.

Psychiatrists and other mental health professionals can do periodic Internet searches of themselves to keep abreast of any personal or professional information about them that may have implications for their reputation. In some cases, web site administrators may be contacted who will remove what is posted. Those who use social networking sites like Facebook should probably use all available privacy settings so that personal information about them is not available to the public.

The education of psychiatric residents and other mental health professionals should include discussions of common challenges that occur in the Internet era so that clinicians have some preparation for dealing with them when they emerge. Finally, guidelines regarding how to continue the treatment and how to respond to the attacks should be developed. Academic psychiatry has a long tradition of establishing protocols to deal constructively with difficult events in the trainee's life, such as patient suicide or assault. Similar forms of support and assistance can be brought to bear to assist with challenges stemming from the Internet."

 Thanks to Ken Pope for this information.

 The entire article is here.

Membership is needed to acces this information.

Gabbard GO. Clinical challenges in the internet era. Am J Psychiatry. 2012

May;169(5):460-3. PubMed PMID: 22549206.