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

Facebook to Exempt Opinion and Satire from Fact-Checking

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 119 posts

Re: Facebook to Exempt Opinion and Satire from Fact-Checking

#71

Post by nradov »

I like Snopes for fact checking but they lost a lot of credibility when they tried to "fact check" a Babylon Bee article that was obviously satire. (Babylon Bee is clearly labeled as satire and humor, sort of like The Onion or Duffel Blog.) Later Snopes tried to partially walk it back, but unfortunately the whole incident gave justification to those who claim that fact checkers are biased and pushing a left-wing agenda on Facebook.

https://www.snopes.com/news/2019/08/16/readers-think-satire-...

Re: Facebook to Exempt Opinion and Satire from Fact-Checking

#73

Post by rjf72 »

MaysonL wrote: post #33
jerrre wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm already looking forward to serious articles that are going to be ironically labeled as satire (obviously again misunderstood by some percentage of the population)

As opposed to the Onion articles which are confusingly close to actual news. [or are merely prescient]

For what it's worth this is new, and intentional. In 2016 Haim Saban, Clinton's top financial supporter, purchased The Onion and immediately transitioned it to an outlet for propaganda under the guise of satire. [1] They rapidly went from running articles like 'Hillary Clinton Tries To Woo Voters By Rescinding Candidacy' [2] to "Why Don't People Like Hillary Clinton?" [3] with reasons such as suggesting in allusion to her being a woman (twice), because she's smart, or verbatim because she "Suffers from unfortunate speech impediment of sounding like a capable, self-possessed woman".

[1] - https://theintercept.com/2016/01/26/ha-ha-hillary-clintons-t...

[2] - https://politics.theonion.com/hillary-clinton-tries-to-woo-v...

[3] - https://politics.theonion.com/why-don-t-people-like-hillary-...

Re: Facebook to Exempt Opinion and Satire from Fact-Checking

#75

Post by jdironman »

SuperFerret wrote: post #50
paxys wrote: post #3

Most of the misinformation and propaganda out there is presented as "opinion" on all networks. The very little actual news on Fox, for example, is always accurate (and actually pretty good), so not being able to call them out on that takes away from the entire effort.

They have 5 good minutes per day.

The weather?

Re: Facebook to Exempt Opinion and Satire from Fact-Checking

#76

Post by tru3_power »

Communitivity wrote: post #68

And here we go.. Funfortunately, most of the misinformation I hear is presented as entertainment. I am fine with it, if like SNL it is clearly labelled as satire, and not done as if it was news (as one network it seems to me often does). Sadly, there are many who watch that network, and shows like its shows, who believe what they are hearing to be the gospel truth. This is to the point of a man arming himself with an…

Doesn’t the responsibility ultimately lay on consumer of said entertainment to ascertain this? Seems like the bigger problem we’re facing here is a mental health problem.

Re: Facebook to Exempt Opinion and Satire from Fact-Checking

#77

Post by catacombs »

AmericanChopper wrote: post #7
paxys wrote: post #3

Most of the misinformation and propaganda out there is presented as "opinion" on all networks. The very little actual news on Fox, for example, is always accurate (and actually pretty good), so not being able to call them out on that takes away from the entire effort.

Most reporting is based on opinions, or is at least misleading in the sense that it tends to be reported from well defined perspective. The editorial decisions about what to report, what to not report, what to report as important or credible, and what to report as irrelevant or non-credible, can all be used to mislead the audience and misrepresent events. I can’t think of one mainstream news outlet that doesn’t do th…

> Most reporting is based on opinions, or is at least misleading in the sense that it tends to be reported from well defined perspective.

What do you mean by this? Most new organizations have a separate, opinion section.

Does your statement include the news department, too?

Re: Facebook to Exempt Opinion and Satire from Fact-Checking

#78

Post by efa »

stareatgoats wrote: post #29

Interesting times, and a slippery slope. These fairly square rules will surely cause other uproars as it invites back the alt-right with their tongue-in-cheek fascism. And the Facebook algorithms seem embarrassingly incapable of nuance, like this Tommy Robinson debacle: the mere mention of the name "Tommy Robinson" in a post (in Sweden) renders your profile inactive for several days or indefinitely. In other countrie…

What is tongue-in-cheek fascism? Example.

Re: Facebook to Exempt Opinion and Satire from Fact-Checking

#79

Post by Bartweiss »

Communitivity wrote: post #68

And here we go.. Funfortunately, most of the misinformation I hear is presented as entertainment. I am fine with it, if like SNL it is clearly labelled as satire, and not done as if it was news (as one network it seems to me often does). Sadly, there are many who watch that network, and shows like its shows, who believe what they are hearing to be the gospel truth. This is to the point of a man arming himself with an…

The most aggravating thing is that this should be a trivial fix!

If certain sources are being excluded from the system, mark them as such. It doesn't have to be a value judgement or dismissal. Just tagging "opinion or satire, not fact-checked" would be a huge step up. Beyond any topical debate, it's general good practice to make that sort of distinction. "Evaluated, nothing found" and "not evaluated" are fundamentally different: one is false, the other is null. Failing to distinguish them is either a serious oversight or an intentional weakening of an evaluation system.

Post reply on HN