General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe "quote from Jane Goodall" in the trending "Ladies & Gentlemen, Jane Goodall !!!" thread ISN'T from Jane Goodall
The thread is here: https://www.democraticunderground.com/100219409589
I posted a correction in reply 8 there, but I don't know if that mistaken OP will be corrected.
The quote is from Karen Karbo, and the source is an interview done for National Geographic.
What I posted there:
___
That quote ISN'T from Jane Goodall, though it's often attributed to her by mistake. It's from Karen Karbo, who
was quoted in a National Geographic article that was mostly an Interview with Karbo after she wrote In Praise of Difficult Women, which was about Goodall, Amelia Earhart and 26 other women.
From that 2018 article:
These 29 women werent willing to be anything but fully themselves, from Jane Goodall to Frida Kahlo to Billie Jean King.
By Simon Worrall
May 12, 2018
If you obey all the rules, you miss all the fun, Katharine Hepburn once remarked. So, in honor of Mothers Day, we have asked Karen Karbo, author of In Praise of Difficult Women, to talk about some of the iconic women that have inspired her, from aviator Amelia Earhart to newscaster Rachel Maddow and National Geographic Explorer Jane Goodall. What links them all is a determination to trust themselves and the courage to break the rules.
Speaking from her home in Portland, Oregon, Karbo explains why Jane Goodall was one of her childhood heroes; why she finds the demands of modern American womanhood such a challenge; and why women are often labelled difficult just for being themselves.
Being difficult is usually a negative character trait. But you celebrate it as a virtue. Unpack the paradox for us and explain how it links the diverse women you profile.
There are invisible quotes around difficult that dont appear in the title. Women who are strong, passionate and determined dont walk around saying, Oh, look, Im difficult. They just believe theyre living their lives. Its a word slapped on them by other people. If you dont care too much what people think, you risk being called a difficult woman because youre not staying in your lane or doing what is expected of you. For the most part, any time a woman doesnt do that she can be called difficult. When a woman inconveniences somebody she can be called difficult. A woman who believes her own needs, goals, and desires are at least as important as everyone around her risks being called difficult. One of the first reviewers said, Thats a pretty low bar. I said, Thank you for making my point for me. Because it actually doesnt take much to be considered a difficult woman. Thats why there are so many of us. [laughs]
-snip-
A lot of people have wrongly attributed to that to Goodall, probably because they remember the photo of her with the article.
But as soon as I checked the quote, I noticed that none of the people attributing it to her mentioned a source for it.
So I did a bit more checking and found the quote itself, and the actual source.
Please correct your OP.
moonscape
(5,187 posts)be the job of OP. Failing that, corrections/deletions should happen asap but dont seem to.
highplainsdem
(51,412 posts)DUers leave misinformation in posts.
Hekate
(93,494 posts)highplainsdem
(51,412 posts)Wednesdays
(19,245 posts)Pinback
(12,668 posts)consists of low-effort Xitter reposts, free of any attempt at verification, you have to wonder what the real agenda is.
WhiteTara
(29,970 posts)that poster is very lazy and likes to post sensational headlines of their own, rather than using the usual DU protocol of using the actual headline. I had to block because I found it so annoying.
Wednesdays
(19,245 posts)JoseBalow
(4,384 posts)The amount of time and effort put in to their flood of twitter reposts makes me wonder what this is really all about. I have asked multiple times what they did before coming here, but they have never replied.
RandomNumbers
(18,059 posts)It is widely attributed to Dr. Jane Goodall.
Much as many quotes attributed to Gandhi were not really said by him.
I have other issues with the lazy Xitter postings that appear here. It is more than that one poster. (I have blocked some, not yet that one because sometimes theirs are at least interesting.)
Edit to add: I see now the poster of that one was banned, so no need for me to block them now. Also, I do appreciate the fact-checkers on this site.
Cha
(302,627 posts)And, Shining the Light on Fake Accounts & Misattributed Quotes!
highplainsdem
(51,412 posts)they saw on Twitter, and it turned out to be from an Etsy t-shirt vendor, and was not only probably an AI-generated image, but it also violated Grateful Dead copyrights and trademarks.
There's a lot of very iffy stuff out there.
Cha
(302,627 posts)TY
demmiblue
(37,646 posts)highplainsdem
(51,412 posts)as carefully as they should - especially when they might mislead DUers into posting replies to misinformation or copying it elsewhere.
progree
(11,449 posts)Last edited Sun Sep 1, 2024, 07:57 PM - Edit history (1)
while the first corrective in that thread posted to them was 453 PM CT.
Thank you for checking it out and informing them and us.
Edited to add for convenience of reference:
The thread in question Ladies & Gentlemen, Jane Goodall !!!
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100219409589
Edited: I removed the person's name and the person's profile link from this post after reading that the OP was alerted on.
highplainsdem
(51,412 posts)I've tried to check quotes found online ever since discovering how many were either invented or wrongly attributed. Sometimes it's incredibly disappointing to find out the quote's completely fake or at least credited to the wrong person.
Bad as it is now, though, this is going to seem like the golden age of internet reliability as AI adds more misinformation, whether as misinformation intended by the AI user or just hallucinations from the AI that aren't caught before something gets put online.
highplainsdem
(51,412 posts)the email or pointing out on the board that the OP about Goodall is wrong.
progree
(11,449 posts)For convenience of reference, Ladies & Gentlemen, Jane Goodall !!!
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100219409589
Thanks very much for all you do on keeping us informed on what's posted around here that's not true.
ms liberty
(9,539 posts)It's not new behavior. It's a repeat offense.
GoCubsGo
(32,767 posts)Same M.O. to a "T." The "Ignore" function is your friend.
ms liberty
(9,539 posts)I've become quite the suspicious and skeptical lady in my old age!
Hekate
(93,494 posts)ms liberty
(9,539 posts)JoseBalow
(4,384 posts)where their posts are always present.
Mousetoescamper
(4,524 posts)are willfully left to stand uncorrected.
Thanks for bringing this to our attention.
highplainsdem
(51,412 posts)Jose Garcia
(2,756 posts)highplainsdem
(51,412 posts)ailsagirl
(23,350 posts)Fiendish Thingy
(17,327 posts)Ive had that OP on ignore for awhile now because of their incessant spreading of misinformation and clickbait.
Scrivener7
(52,096 posts)Fiendish Thingy
(17,327 posts)My latest page is never blank, but it does have a greater variety of interesting posts than before I put the clickbaiters on ignore.
Scrivener7
(52,096 posts)but blanks at the bottom of each. It doesn't happen on my phone.
Response to highplainsdem (Original post)
Post removed
highplainsdem
(51,412 posts)Thanks for letting us know what's going on.
Hekate
(93,494 posts)
already, and no result. If this issue had been dealt with by the hosts or admins 6 weeks ago, we wouldnt be having this conversation in the open now.
progree
(11,449 posts)Hekate
(93,494 posts)Back at the beginning there were a couple of posters who said things like: How many of you are there? and When do you ever sleep?
But they managed to slip past MIRT, and now have nearly 2 thousand posts since signing up on July 17, 2024. Weve learned to deal with troll-farms in past years but were not equipped to deal with AI-generative programs.
highplainsdem
(51,412 posts)might copy the misinformation elsewhere and then have to spend time correcting their own posts elsewhere after being misled here.
progree
(11,449 posts)even if it is an entirely valid comment about an errant post. (DU is a big tent and all that and there are all kinds and it only takes one person to alert).
You've probably noticed that a post (#16) merely saying this thread has been alerted on has been removed from this thread-- that took the work of 5 or more people (one alerter plus 4 or more out of 7 jurors). So one never knows.
Response to progree (Reply #72)
Post removed
progree
(11,449 posts)rule is very, well, explicit.
highplainsdem
(51,412 posts)to convince that DUer to check more carefully before posting something.
Hekate
(93,494 posts)
to want to now how the alert could have been justified in the first place. I am very glad the alerter (whoever it might have been) was unsuccessful.
The more I think about it, the more I think this is a conversation we need to have. The poster in question is flooding the zone in a manner suggestive of an artificial entity of some kind learning what pushes our buttons.
highplainsdem
(51,412 posts)Hekate
(93,494 posts)Whew
highplainsdem
(51,412 posts)moonscape
(5,187 posts)moonscape
(5,187 posts)take that never occurred to me. My brain isnt wired for this new AI reality.
Hekate
(93,494 posts)I am mindful that over-alerting can get me in trouble, so I limit myself. Also I often find that theres not something in the Alert lists that exactly applies. Once I was concerned enough about a repeat offender that I wrote to a forum host, to no avail ( ie no answer )
likesmountains 52
(4,161 posts)chia
(2,321 posts)likesmountains 52
(4,161 posts)chia
(2,321 posts)demmiblue
(37,646 posts)ms liberty
(9,539 posts)To the Alert system. This was in response to this same issue from the same member - who had barely been here two weeks then.
I kicked it again yesterday or today, I forget which day, lol. We still have an issue and there is no category that fits many of these offenses properly at present.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/125626466
Hekate
(93,494 posts)this year that I have swallowed mis/disinformation. At best I go back and remove my Rec. At worst, I have to go back to a person IRL and retract something I told them was true.
We all have a stake in maintaining DUs reputation for purveying factual information. Help us do that, please.
ms liberty
(9,539 posts)highplainsdem
(51,412 posts)do the same thing I do and sometimes forget to finish posting something after previewing it (especially when I have multiple tabs open).
I'll check the thread out!
I posted some possible remedies in one of my replies in the thread about the fake Usha Vance tweet that was posted:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100219405016#post31
And the need for such temporary hides would be eliminated if people would quote a reliable source, and not just anyone on Twitter. And also use Google or another search engine (regular search, not an idiotic AI summary) to check it. If those sources are in the OP, it would take probably less than a minute to check them.
This sort of temporary hide shouldn't count toward an FFR. And hopefully DUers making these mistakes wouldn't keep posting misinformation, or not bother correcting it.
It might be a good idea, too, to remove recs and replies from threads riling DUers up with misinformation. And maybe just lock the thread after it's been corrected. If there's anything in an OP of misinformation worth posting, it can always be posted as a new OP. Otherwise people seeing it later may post reactions to replies that shouldn't have been posted and wouldn't have been if those DUers hadn't been misled by the OP.
I mentioned this in another reply:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100219405016#post36
If they do care at all, I hope they'll not only correct or delete that post, but also post an apology. Show at least that much concern for having misled people. And be much more careful in the future.
DU reminds me in some ways of the vBulletin/phpBB type boards as I was used to, but it's custom and I have no idea if thers are any settings that would keep a certain DUer's posts from appearing until a host or admin has time to review them. If they post misinformation over and over, it would be desirable. But if they post a lot every day and their posts need to be reviewed first, it becomes a real chore. If they've been told they're making mistakes but don't try to avoid them, don't learn...
ms liberty
(9,539 posts)I'm going over now to kick it.
I remember your posts you've highlighted here and I agree with you in the main. We need to get a grip on this issue.
Scrivener7
(52,096 posts)chia
(2,321 posts)cliffside
(330 posts)JoseBalow
(4,384 posts)Bucky
(55,334 posts)No, wait, that was Winston Churchill
Scrivener7
(52,096 posts)Not enough hidden posts, so it must be something else.
moonscape
(5,187 posts)not being filled with sorrow.
Scrivener7
(52,096 posts)posts with actual information. And was sooo annoying.
cliffside
(330 posts)Hekate
(93,494 posts)progree
(11,449 posts)don't have the power to FFR or PPR anyone (they can lock a thread or block someone from a forum but that's the max they can do).
demmiblue
(37,646 posts)Ruby... shoo!
Good riddance!
Pinback
(12,668 posts)Thanks for the news.
LudwigPastorius
(10,276 posts)There have been more than a few OPs lately from people who won't do the basic due diligence to find out if they are spreading misinformation.