Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook admits rogue employees may have shown bias against conservatives

washingtontimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 231 posts

Re: Facebook admits rogue employees may have shown bias against conservatives

#171

Post by Torgo »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #85
kailuowang wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am curious how many of these medias actually admit that they are biased themselves?

That of course is the interesting question. Of course the media knows they are biased, some even call it out in their tag line like "The conservative voice" others are less outspoken. Facebook is in an interesting position, they have such a wide swath of populations for reasons other than an editorial slant, they have people on site who might disagree with their position. Unlike the media where people who don't like…

>t would be perfectly reasonable for Facebook to have an editorial position on the stories.

No it wouldn't, Facebook is nearly ubiquitous. It would have far too much control over dialogue.

Re: Facebook admits rogue employees may have shown bias against conservatives

#172

Post by tremon »

bpodgursky wrote: post #118
kbenson wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what's an example of a less biased news source, and why do you think it's less biased?

I find the CSMonitor to be a good source for review articles (not breaking news, but breaking news is rarely that informative IMO): http://www.csmonitor.com/ I read the Economist and while I won't call it unbiased, it's honest and usually presents both sides. For day-of news it's tougher but direct Reuters pieces usually have minimal interpretation and are pretty good.

Out of curiosity, what would "unbiased" look like to you if "usually presents both sides" doesn't make the cut? Are you looking for more sides than two, or less than one? Something else entirely?

Re: Facebook admits rogue employees may have shown bias against conservatives

#174

Post by ChrisArgyle »

chimeracoder wrote: post #161
ChrisArgyle wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I took "systematic bias" to have similar meaning to "systematic error" meaning that there is a constant shift on every data point. Admitting the possibility of bias is very different than admitting bias in every single trending content decision.

> Admitting the possibility of bias is very different than admitting bias in every single trending content decision. They don't have to admit bias in every content decision. They have to admit systematic bias in content decisions in the aggregate, which does not necessarily imply bias in every content decision. While it is technically, theoretically possible that their system is open to the introduction of these bias…

> While it is technically, theoretically possible that their system is open to the introduction of these biases but does not actually exhibit those biases in the aggregate, it is astoundingly unlikely.

We're in agreement there. A company that is progressive-liberal by nature is going to show some of that bias the company's actions. Even with a conscious effort to avoid bias they'll fall prey to biases they aren't aware of.

Re: Facebook admits rogue employees may have shown bias against conservatives

#175

Post by Turing_Machine »

wry_discontent wrote: post #82

Why am I supposed to care? Facebook isn't a news source. They're a software company. They're under no obligation to be fair and balanced.

They wouldn't be under an obligation to be "fair and balanced" even if they were a news source. That's utterly irrelevant.

However, given that the American electorate skews 37% conservative, 35% moderate, and 24% liberal, they might have a fiduciary duty to their stockholders to not alienate large swathes of users.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/188129/conservatives-hang-ideolog...

Re: Facebook admits rogue employees may have shown bias against conservatives

#176

Post by Uhhrrr »

mmanfrin wrote: post #70
6stringmerc wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In an alternative scenario you could have the state-run media, cough insert-name-here cough , simply forcing every single outlet to run with their version of the headline: "There still is no Facebook, only use National Party Communication Gathering Website!"

Studies have found that state run media in democratic nations are the least biased. NPR, BBC.

From just today, evidence of NPR bias: http://www.mediaite.com/uncategorized/emails-show-npr-cancel...

Re: Facebook admits rogue employees may have shown bias against conservatives

#177

Post by tremon »

randyrand wrote: post #137
nostromo wrote: post #15

It's interesting how media outlets are spinning this news. People that read conservative media are left thinking that Facebook has admitted bias. People that read liberal media are left thinking the opposite. Washington Times: "Facebook admits rogue employees may have shown bias against conservatives" LA Times: "Facebook investigation reveals no evidence of bias against conservative topics, company says" NY Times: "F…

Slightly off topic - Why does it seem there are so many more liberal news outlets than conservative ones?

Because there's many more ways to disagree than ways to agree.

Re: Facebook admits rogue employees may have shown bias against conservatives

#178

Post by gnaritas »

nametakenobv wrote: post #138
solipsism wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not "allowed"? By whom? I'm afraid it's you who is confused. The first amendment doesn't recognize a difference between "editorial content" and non-"editorial content". Comcast could carry only conservative channels without issue.

>Comcast could carry only conservative channels without issue. This is nonsense. When there is concentration in information distribution, the distributor must allow anyone and everyone equal access to the channel.

According to what, your gut? If you're going to keep insisting that companies "must" do this or that, you need to cite the law that requires them to do so.

Re: Facebook admits rogue employees may have shown bias against conservatives

#179

Post by tremon »

solipsism wrote: post #120
wry_discontent wrote: post #82

Why am I supposed to care? Facebook isn't a news source. They're a software company. They're under no obligation to be fair and balanced.

News organizations also are under no obligation to be fair and balanced (obviously). They don't even have to pretend they are if they don't want to. Some think they should be obligated, but that's a different discussion.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11764095 seems to suggest that at least political candidates can "enforce" some fairness if they'd care to do so.
Post reply on HN