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

Combating Misinformation

about.fb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 57 posts

Re: Combating Misinformation

#21

Post by CarelessExpert »

reubenswartz wrote: post #14

Stepping away from the specifics of Facebook's history, does anyone have solid ideas for how globe-spanning communities should function? It seems next to impossible to both allow individuals to share things and make sure that you only see "true" things in that community. And it seems that given the numbers involved, there will always be some amount of "accidental" misinformation that has a real impact, and deliberate…

> does anyone have solid ideas for how globe-spanning communities should function?

Your mistake is thinking the problem is in the communities, as opposed to the technology platforms themselves.

Personally, as a starting point I'd want them to:

1. Kill algorithmic curation that is based on "engagement". These digital skinner boxes are a cancer on society.

2. Introduce much stronger privacy laws that discourage or prevent data collection used to drive targeted advertising. Reduce or eliminate the financial incentives driving #1.

3. Provide complete and open transparency around how these platforms engage in their moderation decisions. Reporting leads one to suspect Zuck stepped into to help out right-wing agitators. Twitter is making their own arbitrary decisions. We all need to know if these decisions are happening and how they're being made.

Re: Combating Misinformation

#22

Post by warkdarrior »

theNJR wrote: post #4

>For claims that don’t directly result in physical harm, like conspiracy theories about the origin of the virus, we continue to work with our network of over 55 fact-checking partners covering over 45 languages to debunk these claims... Once a post is rated false by a fact-checker, we reduce its distribution so fewer people see it, and we show strong warning labels and notifications to people who still come across it…

What do you suggest Facebook should have done when WHO said to not wear masks? If they cannot rely on WHO for health expertise, whose expertise should they count on?

Re: Combating Misinformation

#23

Post by fractionalhare »

goalieca wrote: post #19

Who decides the truth? I don’t want to muddy the waters too much but i am concerned with current trend to appeal to science as an authority of truth to justify whatever public policy is in play. Scientific publishing can be a chaotic process where a healthy skepticism should be maintained. The truth is never easy to ascertain. In fact, one of the highest cited papers from an epidemiologist is titled « Why Most Publis…

Online discourse would be vastly improved if everyone meticulously cited peer reviewed papers and used no other substantiation. It still wouldn't be perfect, but at least there'd be a commitment to rigor. The current status quo is telling people they're wrong, citing nothing, and telling them they "just haven't done enough research."

Re: Combating Misinformation

#24

Post by agumonkey »

goalieca wrote: post #19

Who decides the truth? I don’t want to muddy the waters too much but i am concerned with current trend to appeal to science as an authority of truth to justify whatever public policy is in play. Scientific publishing can be a chaotic process where a healthy skepticism should be maintained. The truth is never easy to ascertain. In fact, one of the highest cited papers from an epidemiologist is titled « Why Most Publis…

I'm no PhD but the more I read pubmed the more I realize that science truth is often a time vetted average.

The recent decade has been obsessed with truth as an road to ideal life.

I believe in local first reality now, relativistically so.

Re: Combating Misinformation

#26

Post by nillium »

j4yav wrote: post #12

Whatever the solution is for misinformation, if there is one, I am quite certain that it will not be invented by Facebook.

The problem with misinformation, ultimately, is that it is given a platform. We've reached an inflection point where people can truly believe these mistruths so deeply, that any fact checking is received as a personal attack -- and they get even more defensive.

Facebook (or YouTube, or Twitter, or whoever) can try to come up with even more infoboxes or disclaimers, but it will continue to exist as long as it is given a platform.

The original sin of social media comes down to the idea that anyone can post, and that virality begets virality. Shocking content is presented on the same level as traditional media -- and in many cases, can exceed those traditional news sources' reach.

FWIW, and disclosure -- we're building a platform that aims to combat misinfo by making it only for news. (https://blog.nillium.com/were-not-an-aggregator/).

Our reporters follow an Editorial Policy, that comes with consequences if they break the guidelines. Virtually every respectable news org has something like this -- we're just making ours public. https://www.forthapp.com/docs/policy.html

Until we hold the reporting produced by professional reporters -- reviewed by editors, fact checked, and held in check by an editorial process -- at a higher esteem than what Firstname Bunchanumbers says, misinformation will continue.

Re: Combating Misinformation

#27

Post by kikokikokiko »

j4yav wrote: post #12

Whatever the solution is for misinformation, if there is one, I am quite certain that it will not be invented by Facebook.

The ONLY way to fight misinformation, intentional or not, is to allow a free exchange of ideas. The stupid ones, in the end would be shown as stupid and sink. But in todays world people seem to think that other people, "being the dumb ones", need to be protected from their stupidity, and "us being the sage ones" need to hide the dumb ideias from the dumb ones. Such arrogance.

Re: Combating Misinformation

#28

Post by cowabungabruce »

warkdarrior wrote: post #13
cowabungabruce wrote: post #5

They can remove the entire newsfeed and remove the ability for users to share links? Oh wait, nevermind, this is "Combating Misinformation WHILE STAYING a multibillion rev business who makes money from users' attention"

You might as well ask to shut down the whole Internet. Even if Facebook disappears tomorrow, there are plenty of other social platforms to allow the spread of disinformation.

Gotta starve the beast somehow. Then worry about the other minnows.

Re: Combating Misinformation

#29

Post by simmanian »

reubenswartz wrote: post #14

Stepping away from the specifics of Facebook's history, does anyone have solid ideas for how globe-spanning communities should function? It seems next to impossible to both allow individuals to share things and make sure that you only see "true" things in that community. And it seems that given the numbers involved, there will always be some amount of "accidental" misinformation that has a real impact, and deliberate…

To answer your question, you must begin with the metaphysics i.e. our worldview. Our civilization currently operates under the assumption that there exists one truth and everyone must adhere to that truth. It worked out fine when we were in small towns, but now that literally billions of people are connected, we're realizing that not everyone can be in sync.

To cut the long story short, there are many people who believe that we need to have a fundamentally different approach to how we form communities. Decentralization is one of those trends in tech that could help us get there.

Re: Combating Misinformation

#30

Post by j4yav »

fractionalhare wrote: post #25
j4yav wrote: post #12

Whatever the solution is for misinformation, if there is one, I am quite certain that it will not be invented by Facebook.

But Facebook can at least work towards it, even if you're pessimistic they'll solve it. That's what this blog post is about.

The very first sentence on the page is how they are stopping it. If their ambition is to work towards something vaguely better, then sure, seems reasonable.
Post reply on HN