Live data from Hacker News

News Feed FYI: Addressing Hoaxes and Fake News

newsroom.fb.com

21–30 of 148 posts

Re: News Feed FYI: Addressing Hoaxes and Fake News

#21
post #4

ok, so now the obvious question becomes, who fact checks the fact checkers? i don't blame facebook, but the people that have been asking for this i guess are about to get what they deserve: more consolidation of the power of persuasion of the masses into the hands of facebook. want to instantly discredit a story? just UPDATE stories SET disputed = t WHERE ID = ?

I think you misunderstand the format of a fact check. It's a distinct piece of content that has its own schema.org markup. It should include only editorial analysis and not opinion. It features reference sources and encourages readers to visit them. It is in its ideal form pure objective journalism. Sites adorn themselves with cute logos about the veracity of the claim but really they should be serving a compilation of facts. If they fail to do so regularly Facebook's credibility is on the line so they will be ensuring they only link to quality sources.

They couldn't just batch discredit a topic because they need something to link to.

Re: News Feed FYI: Addressing Hoaxes and Fake News

#22
post #6

I wonder if this will be as sketchy as politifact? I hope it won't be, but I reckon it might be. (What I mean is: extremely uncharitable readings of things that they don't like, but overly charitable readings of anything that they like.)

Politifact is one of the organizations on the approved list [1], and the closest thing I can find on that list to an organization anyone not on the left is likely to regard as politically neutral is the Associated Press. So I'm not really seeing what Facebook expects this to help. [1] http://www.poynter.org/fact-checkers-code-of-principles/

Maybe stop the spread of nonsense like 'pope endorses Trump' or pizzagate?

Re: News Feed FYI: Addressing Hoaxes and Fake News

#23
post #14
post #4

ok, so now the obvious question becomes, who fact checks the fact checkers? i don't blame facebook, but the people that have been asking for this i guess are about to get what they deserve: more consolidation of the power of persuasion of the masses into the hands of facebook. want to instantly discredit a story? just UPDATE stories SET disputed = t WHERE ID = ?

Why cant facebook just go after blogspam clickbait in general? If a story is a copy of a copy, have the algorithm favor the original instead of the blogspam. If a local news agency copies an AP/Reuters story word for word, have the software suggest replacing the replica with the original. Treat local news duplicates the same as any wordpress+adsense blog. If journalists are adding commentary thats a different story (…

Maybe follow the link and evaluate the ad:content ratio or just the raw number of different ad services on the page. Seems like the collateral damage to such an approach would largely improve the overall web experience.

Re: News Feed FYI: Addressing Hoaxes and Fake News

#24
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Humans in the loop means the criteria will not be the same.

What is the alternative? Right now the alternative is to add another layer of bias in between.

The alternative is to allow free and open communication that is unmediated, unannotated, and unmoderated by any authority, and to allow information consumers to decide what they should and should not read and believe themselves.

It's the difference between the web and a walled garden.

I get that FB is interested in mediating, annotating, and moderating content, since they are a walled garden.

That's why I choose not to use FB, which is my right as a web user.

Re: News Feed FYI: Addressing Hoaxes and Fake News

#25
Expecting corporate media to sanitize itself might be a new proof of Einstein's rule of insanity. The only short term solution to rampant widespread disinformation in the MSM is a healthy and sustained level of cynicism. Its time the media was truly disrupted and dispatched to the bottom of the see.

Re: News Feed FYI: Addressing Hoaxes and Fake News

#26
post #6

I wonder if this will be as sketchy as politifact? I hope it won't be, but I reckon it might be. (What I mean is: extremely uncharitable readings of things that they don't like, but overly charitable readings of anything that they like.)

Politifact is one of the organizations on the approved list [1], and the closest thing I can find on that list to an organization anyone not on the left is likely to regard as politically neutral is the Associated Press. So I'm not really seeing what Facebook expects this to help. [1] http://www.poynter.org/fact-checkers-code-of-principles/

Maybe reality doesn't match your opinions.

Re: News Feed FYI: Addressing Hoaxes and Fake News

#27
post #8

The timing of this makes it seem politically motivated. I've seen plenty of fake news on my liberal feed. Things like 9/11 conspiracy theories, anti-vaccination stories, stories about the dangers of genetically modified foods, etc.

Fake news was a massive problem this election cycle, and it really highlighted Facebook's large influence and their inability to actually do anything about it. So yes, Facebook dealing with fake news here is a reaction to what happened during the election, but that's not a bad thing. Fake news turns out to be a serious problem and it needs to be fixed, regardless of your political leanings.

Edit: Why am I being downvoted for this? If you disagree with me, please explain why.

Re: News Feed FYI: Addressing Hoaxes and Fake News

#28
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why cant facebook just go after blogspam clickbait in general? If a story is a copy of a copy, have the algorithm favor the original instead of the blogspam. If a local news agency copies an AP/Reuters story word for word, have the software suggest replacing the replica with the original. Treat local news duplicates the same as any wordpress+adsense blog. If journalists are adding commentary thats a different story (…

Maybe follow the link and evaluate the ad:content ratio or just the raw number of different ad services on the page. Seems like the collateral damage to such an approach would largely improve the overall web experience.

I do think it important to consolidate duplicates of stories, and credit the original copy. Maybe a feature (that users can disable if it fails) that automatically finds the source and replaces the post with the original.

Maybe two versions of the newsfeed, the default "sterilized" and a hidden but accessible "raw"

Re: News Feed FYI: Addressing Hoaxes and Fake News

#29
post #8

The timing of this makes it seem politically motivated. I've seen plenty of fake news on my liberal feed. Things like 9/11 conspiracy theories, anti-vaccination stories, stories about the dangers of genetically modified foods, etc.

Issues are often only addressed when they become important enough to have major consequences. That doesn't make reaction inherently political.

The amount of conservative gaslighting out there today is really troubling. Any source which doesn't agree with their biased version of reality is "liberal."

It's amazing to me how effectively the alt-right has taken over Hacker News to the point where fact-checking is considered harmful.

Re: News Feed FYI: Addressing Hoaxes and Fake News

#30
post #8

The timing of this makes it seem politically motivated. I've seen plenty of fake news on my liberal feed. Things like 9/11 conspiracy theories, anti-vaccination stories, stories about the dangers of genetically modified foods, etc.

If there's an obvious partisan slant to the 'fact-checking' then people will eventually discredit the warnings at best and at worst they will become the butt of many censorship jokes. The SNL skits are probably writing themselves as we speak...Girl posts on her friends wall "I'm so happy for you!!!!" [WARNING: 3rd party fact checker determined this to be false] If that happens, the brand damage to facebook will be re…

The warnings may be discredited but the disputed stories will appear lower on the news feed according to FB. "Appear lower" is the least controversial way for FB to dip its toe in this water, so we'll see how the censorship actually plays out.
Post reply on HN