Man, I'm going to miss Gwen Ifill.
Snowden: Stop Relying on Facebook for Your News
121–130 of 342 posts
Re: Snowden: Stop Relying on Facebook for Your News
#122The last 12 months I have visited Snopes more times than not in order to disprove some of the articles my Facebook friends choose to share. It's slightly alarming that people don't think they need to fact check. You know it's bad when the President-elect opens up about his internet fact checking[0]. It sets a dangerous precedent. There are less intelligent people in this world who read deeply into these "articles" an…
> What can we do? Upvotes/downvotes? Won't work at scale, because likes/shares have a connotation of legitimacy.
News verification seems like the perfect application of NLP, AI, and data mining techniques.
Can it make any money for anyone? Right now it is much more profitable to make fake news and use data mining to manipulate people: http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/features/2015-11-12/is-the...
Re: Snowden: Stop Relying on Facebook for Your News
#123I have interacted with several people on Facebook who rely on fake news sources. I pointed out fake news articles several times on one person's Facebook page. She agreed the articles were not true. However, she added "I don't have time to figure out if they're true. People can read your comments." I asked her what she thought of the fact that this particular article, which was blatantly false, was shared 16,000 times…
Sounds like a problem with your friends, not Facebook.
Not at all, unless he has 16.000 friends.
Re: Snowden: Stop Relying on Facebook for Your News
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've had similar experiences on Facebook. Facts don't matter. Even when linking to proof that something is fake news, the fake news doesn't get removed or addressed. This article about how Macedonian high school students are behind a lot of the fake news is worth reading: https://www.buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman/how-macedonia-became...
This has me deeply, deeply concerned. The election is one thing, but what happens if/when elected officials start screwing with something like Social Security, resulting in a generation of people who had their tax dollars deferred, but saw no benefit when they retired? In a post-fact world, I'm not convinced that the people will take action against such a thing.
The fact that "post-fact world" is even a thing is frightening.
Re: Snowden: Stop Relying on Facebook for Your News
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
Note that when confronted about false stories (which were sourced from white aupremacist propaganda) he retweeted, the President-elect, while still a candidate, responded fairly similarly, so, yeah, it's definitely an attitude that is becoming quite normalized.
It's that combined with the echo chamber effect of their algorithms. I've watched a diverse group of smart and average people across political spectrum this election. Most of them consistently shared unsubstantiated claims or biased media. As expected, their media was always presenting evidence for their side and agsinst the other. Corporate media always did that for maximizing ratings and ad impressions. However, th…
It would be really nice if you wouldn't consistently post such balanced comments as they're doing nothing to reinforce the polarization, anger, and frustration we find so vital to drive engagement, page views, clicks, and time on site.
"The effects will only get worse over time."
I'm trying to think of comparable societal changes that we've been able to reverse at least sufficiently ameliorate. My imagination (and knowledge of history) are too limited. Anyone have some good examples? Or know of projects that are working on similar topics?
Re: Snowden: Stop Relying on Facebook for Your News
#126Wasn't there the simpsons episode when Homer started spreading fake news on the internet to become famous?
Re: Snowden: Stop Relying on Facebook for Your News
#127I have interacted with several people on Facebook who rely on fake news sources. I pointed out fake news articles several times on one person's Facebook page. She agreed the articles were not true. However, she added "I don't have time to figure out if they're true. People can read your comments." I asked her what she thought of the fact that this particular article, which was blatantly false, was shared 16,000 times…
You assume people ever cared about facts. People are more emotional than they are rational when it comes to things that are outside of their control. While someone might be perfectly rational and logical in their life (e.g. they pay their taxes, they go to work, they make smart choices in their day to day lives), when it comes to things that are outside of our control (politics, economy, death, etc).
We have always been pretty irrational and easy to manipulate.
Re: Snowden: Stop Relying on Facebook for Your News
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
What publication would you recommend instead if I'm looking for relatively unbiased, fact-based news?
I honestly think it's impossible to find truly unbiased news sources. That being said, at least most trusted biased sources still root their information in facts and have journalistic integrity. I'm not going to throw out NYT, WP, NPR, Vox, WSJ, National Review, etc. just because they lean in particular directions. If anything, I'd rather have news sources that are widely known to lean a certain side, because then I…
Maybe Al Jazeera
Re: Snowden: Stop Relying on Facebook for Your News
#129Why is social media getting all the flak? What about all the fake news on Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, New York Times, CNN, Fox News, et al?
Re: Snowden: Stop Relying on Facebook for Your News
#130I am more than a little disappointed in Snowden for falling for this gambit. Blaming the "fake news on the internet" for the loss to Trump is just the Left's way to divert attention to their own failures to report fairly or even try to understand his popularity without dismissing or smearing everyone as racists, homo-phobes and misogynists. This latest post-election narrative is a ploy, and if it gains any traction, it will allow the Left to avoid the mea culpa's and soul-searching that they need in order reclaim their shredded credibility.
Far more importantly, especially for the denizens of HN, is that this call to regulate and control the news on the internet cannot be used to institute government controls, licensing, "pressure" or threats, etc. as a solution. Private companies cannot practice censorship so Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Breitbart, etc. are all free to establish their own policies on what to carry on their properties. This is far far different from the government becoming the arbiter of what is "fake" or not or what is politically or socially acceptable or not and then using the power of the state to silence you with threats, fines, jail or even death (in some countries) if you anger the gang in power. Keep a close eye on any FCC proposals because now that they have regulatory control over the internet[1] the legal authority is already in place to censor the internet. If they start floating regulations or even "suggestions" that claim we have to vet the "news" for the "public-good" look out[2]. You have been warned.
[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/27/technology/net-neutrality-...
[2] "The Property Status of Airwaves" by Ayn Rand "Now observe the practical demonstration of the fact that without property rights, no other rights are possible. If censorship and the suppression of free speech ever get established in this country, they will have originated in radio and television" [i.e. via the FCC]. In "Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal" http://www.criminalgovernment.com/docs/aynrand.html