• Facebook to roll out new tools to tackle fake news
    22 replies, posted
[quote]Facebook Inc (FB.O) said on Thursday it will introduce tools to prevent fake news stories from spreading on its platform, an about-face in response to rising criticism that it did not do enough to combat the problem during the U.S. presidential campaign. The social network company stressed that the new features are part of an ongoing process to refine and test how it deals with fake news. It has faced complaints this year involving how it monitors and polices content produced by its 1.8 billion users. Facebook said users will find it easier to flag fake articles on their News Feed as a hoax, and it will work with organizations such as fact-checking website Snopes, ABC News and the Associated Press to check the authenticity of stories. If such organizations identify a story as fake, Facebook said, it will get flagged as "disputed" and be linked to the corresponding article explaining why. The company said disputed stories may appear lower in its news feed, adding that once a story is flagged, it cannot be promoted. A few weeks ago, Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg said it was a "crazy idea" that fake or misleading news on Facebook helped swing the election in favor of Republican Donald Trump. But criticism persisted amid reports that people in the United States and other countries have fabricated sensational hoaxes meant to appeal to conservatives. Critics said fake news often was more widely read than news reported by major media organizations. Ahead of the Nov. 8 election, Facebook users saw fake news reports saying Pope Francis endorsed Trump and that a federal agent who had been investigating Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton was found dead. The effort by Facebook is intended to focus on the “worst of the worst” of clear hoaxes created by “spammers for their own gain,” Adam Mosseri, Facebook’s vice president in charge of its News Feed, said in a blog post. Some far-right conservative writers quickly pounced on the announcement, decrying it as a covert attempt to muzzle their legitimate content.[/quote] [url]http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-facebook-idUSKBN1442I0[/url]
Wonderful. Time to put them to good use.
Leaving your detection of fake news to users is retarded. This is going to turn out to be an exercise in people mass flagging things they don't want to believe. If you go to any video on Facebook about climate change there's [I]already [/I]at least 20 people who just write "fake news". As if we needed more r/the_donald level shit in the world.
Think about it, this is a genius move: They can't actually remove fake news, that's how they make a lion share of their money. So, they implement the most impotent feature possible to woo the press and less intelligent readers into thinking they have their best interests at heart when it won't even put a dent in it. Genius, truly genius. Capitalism at work. Think about what these minds could achieve if they applied themselves to something actually fucking worthwhile.
This is only going to cause people to call it 'liberal censorship' and entrench them further within their echo chamber [editline].[/editline] [quote]Some far-right conservative writers quickly pounced on the announcement, decrying it as a covert attempt to muzzle their legitimate content.[/quote]
[QUOTE=Super Muffin;51535873]Leaving your detection of fake news to users is retarded. This is going to turn out to be an exercise in people mass flagging things they don't want to believe. If you go to any video on Facebook about climate change there's [I]already [/I]at least 20 people who just write "fake news". As if we needed more r/the_donald level shit in the world.[/QUOTE] They could put a big [B][I]confirmed[/I][/B] on those that are wrongly reported :v:
[QUOTE=Tamschi;51535984]They could put a big [B][I]confirmed[/I][/B] on those that are wrongly reported :v:[/QUOTE] They could, but something tells me Facebook wouldn't do it particularly quickly. It takes YouTube around a month to end fraudulent copyright disputes or clear videos wrongly flagged for inappropriate content. And they'd have to put 'confirmed' on every fringe Facebook page.
can you imagine the size of the team they'd have to hire to actually sort this kind of thing out hell they don't even stop people that steal videos, so why would they go forth with this system?
What if this article itself is fake?
[QUOTE=Erfly;51536014]What if this article itself is fake?[/QUOTE] Might be since I posted it. :v:
[QUOTE]Facebook said users will find it easier to flag fake articles on their News Feed as a hoax, and it will work with organizations such as fact-checking website Snopes, ABC News and the Associated Press to check the authenticity of stories.[/QUOTE] Important note: they're not just leaving it to users.
You know, given that I just saw [I]this[/I] just this morning: [img]http://i.imgur.com/dNRVRYO.png[/img] I'm glad to hear it
Can it get rid of the Natural News horseshit though
[QUOTE=Tudd;51535851]Facebook said users will find it easier to flag fake articles on their News Feed as a hoax, and it will work with organizations such as fact-checking website Snopes, [b]ABC News[/b] and the Associated Press to check the authenticity of stories.[/QUOTE] If I remember correctly, ABC was one of the first sites to jump on the "active shooter at Ohio State" bandwagon when the attacker did not, in fact, use a gun at all. I'm guessing this is going to apply to conservative sites that blatantly mislead people for clicks, but not the mainstream media outlets who blatantly mislead people due to a lack of fact checking and end up doing just the same. Pretty ironic.
Making a mistake is not the same thing as purposely misleading people.
It does get kind of worrisome when large corporations get to decide what is true information and what isn't. Shouldn't it be up to the individual to glean what they can from a multitude of different sources, what is similar and what is reported differently to learn what the real story is?
[QUOTE=Lambeth;51536559]Making a mistake is not the same thing as purposely misleading people.[/QUOTE] [url]http://abcnews.go.com/US/video/active-shooter-reported-ohio-state-university-43821565[/url] Did nobody think at any stage of reporting this, "maybe we should calm down and check our facts before we headline this as an 'active shooter'?" Being beacons of information in the information age and all, they really should know better. I don't see how it's any better than a headline titled "Jackie Chan passed away this morning," when it's spreading fear and panic just the same. I'm aware that mistakes are made, but the mainstream media has made so many mistakes like this over these past few years, it's amazing how anyone is expected to defer to them as "fact checkers."
[QUOTE=LtKyle2;51536561]It does get kind of worrisome when large corporations get to decide what is true information and what isn't. Shouldn't it be up to the individual to glean what they can from a multitude of different sources, what is similar and what is reported differently to learn what the real story is?[/QUOTE] ...which is why they're also giving tools to the users? [QUOTE=Dark Link;51536620][url]http://abcnews.go.com/US/video/active-shooter-reported-ohio-state-university-43821565[/url] Did nobody think at any stage of reporting this, "maybe we should calm down and check our facts before we headline this as an 'active shooter'?" Being beacons of information in the information age and all, they really should know better. I don't see how it's any better than a headline titled "Jackie Chan passed away this morning," when it's spreading fear and panic just the same. I'm aware that mistakes are made, but the mainstream media has made so many mistakes like this over these past few years, it's amazing how anyone is expected to defer to them as "fact checkers."[/QUOTE] It's a good thing they're adding more than one fact checker and not just ABC News then?
Good. Maybe they'll do something about stolen videos next.
[QUOTE=Lambeth;51536642] It's a good thing they're adding more than one fact checker and not just ABC News then?[/QUOTE] You mean like the Associated Press, who [URL="http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/3d281c11a96b4ad082fe88aa0db04305/Article_2016-11-28-US--Ohio%20State-Active%20Shooter/id-9856a3a417cb4aa1828d72ea82778f66"]did the[/URL] [URL="http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/386c25518f464186bf7a2ac026580ce7/Article_2016-11-28-US--Ohio%20State-Active%20Shooter/id-ef9fbf3b1cff41eba04704b23cec4dd1"]exact same thing[/URL], albeit marginally less sensationalized? I will give them Snopes though.
If we ever reach a stage as a nation that we're formally rewriting/revising the constitution and bill of rights, freedom of the press is going to be first Report factually incorrect information, or rebroadcast incorrectly reported information, with the intent to generate revenue based on the act, and you pay fines. Do it repeatedly and you go to jail. End of.
[QUOTE=redBadger;51536708]Good. Maybe they'll do something about stolen videos next.[/QUOTE] They outright brag about how many views their autoplaying stolen videos get. They're not going to do anything abut it unless they get sued.
I have no faith that this will stick to actual fake news as opposed to political analysis that these places disagree with. Politifact confuses the two all the time.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.