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

Facebook says Pages that regularly share false news won’t be able to buy ads

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 268 posts

Re: Facebook says Pages that regularly share false news won’t be able to buy ads

#121

Post by xienze »

MBCook wrote: post #111
xienze wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it is weird why facebook would be getting into the realm of censoring things at all. Not really. The entire Valley is beside themselves over Trump being elected and Twitter, Facebook, etc. feel partially responsible because Trump and his supporters were able to use the platforms to their advantage. To be outplayed by Republicans through the use of technology was previously thought impossible, so they're going to "f…

Eve if you ignore theoretical bias it may have terrified them to realize that they may have unintentionally had a SERIOUS effect on the ruler of the free world by not only allowing but accidentally promoting obviously fake content. There was plenty of relief content that would have defected the election. The fake stuff may not have actually changed the outcome. But to realize your 'keep up with my friends' business h…

> Eve if you ignore theoretical bias

Real bias, but moving on...

> But to realize your 'keep up with my friends' business has the power swing elections? That has to be a terrifying prospect.

I really doubt anyone at Facebook, Twitter, or Google would have said "oh my God, what have we done???" if some insidious bit of "fake news" helped Hillary be elected.

Re: Facebook says Pages that regularly share false news won’t be able to buy ads

#122

Post by quoquoquo »

wu-ikkyu wrote: post #109
quoquoquo wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So do you support people manipulating and creating fake news but not the people who are trying to prevent it from happening? Facebook can absolutely kick out people who don't behave on their platform. Playing the freedom of speech card doesn't work when you actively try to oppress other's freedom of speech through tactical manipulation. Punishing individuals and groups who willfully and knowingly engage in spreading…

>Punishing individuals and groups who willfully and knowingly engage in spreading information containing false facts concocted to support their intolerant views is absolutely necessary to protect freedom of speech Punishing people for spreading information you don't like in the name of protecting free speech is double speak

Punishing people who willfully concocts false information and disseminates for the purpose of spreading racist/intolerant views are very different than what you've highlighted.

Thinking a group of people is lesser than you because of the arrangement of their skin color pigmentation, and crying freedom of speech is being attacked, is not going to get you a lot of sympathy, especially when you now try to actively shut people up who are calling you out on it.

> freedom of speech means freedom to mislead

sure, but don't get all up and mighty when you get called out and shut down.

Re: Facebook says Pages that regularly share false news won’t be able to buy ads

#123

Post by wooter »

joshuamorton wrote: post #116
wooter wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Benjamin Franklin, a runaway, started his own newspaper - as did his brother - which were called far worse than "fake news" in an "objective" way by the british.

What's your point? I doubt anyone argued that the British East India Company needed to act as a distributor for that paper.

my point is that anyone who explicitly refused to reprint Benjamin Franklin's writings on the realities of the US because they were declared fake and treasonous deserved to be called censorious and biased against freedom of speech. Mind you, more than a couple of his articles were actual fake news meant to stoke discussion on British policies.

Re: Facebook says Pages that regularly share false news won’t be able to buy ads

#125

Post by maxerickson »

briholt wrote: post #28
kumarvvr wrote: post #18

It is unfortunate that platforms like Facebook have become the beacons of pessimism. I am talking in the context of the usage of social media tools to harm society, rather than help it. For me, FB, TW, etc have become unreliable sources of news. Here, FB is trying to limit ads from pages that share false news, but who will decide that?? 1. FB - Leads to a dangerous slippery slope of putting too much power into a sing…

"Fake news" appears to be "news I don't like" and has no correlation with the accuracy of the content. Conveniently, Facebook seems to agree with many major media outlets about what news they don't like, so they can present their arbitrary definition of "fake" as objective and conveniently no one can break through the bubble to prove otherwise.

Yes, there was an intentional campaign to conflate news that people didn't like with sites that were literal fake news, not mistakes or biased coverage, articles made up whole cloth to smear people and such.

Re: Facebook says Pages that regularly share false news won’t be able to buy ads

#126

Post by wu-ikkyu »

jcwayne wrote: post #89

This will be a massive time saver for me. It's a real comfort to know that, from now on, all stories on Facebook will be real news. No more reading the articles to spot the BS, just a quick skim of the headlines and I'll be fully informed on the important matters of the day. /s

>They "trust me". Dumb fucks.

-Zuckmeister

Re: Facebook says Pages that regularly share false news won’t be able to buy ads

#127

Post by graphitezepp »

Jerry2 wrote: post #25
znpy wrote: post #16

instant question: which entity decides and how does such entity decide what news is true news ?

Anything not politically correct and anything that doesn't contribute to manufacturing consent will be labeled as "fake" news. Scary times ahead. It's straight out of 1984.

It's spookier than 1984. There was no prediction of "Big Data" and how prevalent addiction to an omnipresent internet would be.

Re: Facebook says Pages that regularly share false news won’t be able to buy ads

#128

Post by wolco »

adtac wrote: post #17

So they _can_ identify such pages. This is a really small penalty. Why not just outright suspend such pages for a duration that increases with every offence?

Why doesn't facebook come out with there own online wiki and only allow stories based on approved of facts that have been vetted by members of internal fact team.

At least we would know what facts they believe and what facts they don't

Re: Facebook says Pages that regularly share false news won’t be able to buy ads

#129

Post by TallGuyShort »

gscott wrote: post #104
TallGuyShort wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If anyone wants an example of this, look at the coverage of the crowd size at Trump's inauguration. That's still held up as the canonical example of the Trump administration's "alternative facts" (in fact that's when the phrase was coined, I believe). But there's high resolution video of the crowds during the ceremony that clearly contradicts the photos of sparse crowds. I also think the guy is a lying moron, but the…

The crowds up close in the ceremony but further out Obama had more overflow.

I'm talking about images like this: https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/01/20/us/politics/trump.... You can count the lanes that run across the mall before you see any open space, and the photo on the right was clearly not taken any time near the actual ceremony because my memory of live video and recorded video during the ceremony simply doesn't come close to matching.

I really don't care how it actually compares to Obama, and I really don't see why Trump cared so much, but the fact is the pictures are clearly not "facts" either. Yet disputing them is still held up as a common example of "deniers".

Re: Facebook says Pages that regularly share false news won’t be able to buy ads

#130

Post by samfriedman »

bluetidepro wrote: post #2

This is really interesting. I wonder how it will effect Pages that are known for sarcastic/satire type of content on purpose. Pages like The Onion, Hard Times, etc. I feel like there would have to be a lot of work in the fact-checking part of this. At what point will it be too manual of a process, or will the algorithm start to fail on these "grey" areas? Also, it's nice to see Facebook implement a feature solely for…

There was a fairly well-known Facebook page called The Disciples of the New Dawn. They purported to be a cult-like Christian Fundamentalist group, and the page served as a distribution channel for image-macros that seemed designed to get a rise out of people. Things like training children for the militia, eschewing medicine, interpreting pop culture as signs of the end times, etc. The page was also clearly satire, and to lovers of deadpan humor, frequently amusing.

I first learned of the page in 2013, and I noticed that Facebook had removed it for Community Guidelines violations some years later. The page appears to be back now, but they now have very clear disclaimers that the content is satirical.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/satire/facebookdisciples.asp

Post reply on HN