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

Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model

about.fb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

601–610 of 1001 posts

Re: Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model

#601

Post by insane_dreamer »

blackeyeblitzar wrote: post #10
donohoe wrote: post #2

From bad to worse. Meta is probably one of the single largest funders of fact checking. Now that appears to be coming to an end. Third parties will no longer be able to flag misinfo on FB, Instagram or Threads in the US. This is not good imho.

Fact checkers are often wrong, and often corrupted by the activists that end up working at them. For example I’ve repeatedly noticed articles from Politifact that are blatantly wrong or very misleading. When I look up those authors and their other work, their bias is clear. Community notes on X/Twitter is far more effective and accurate.

Yeah, journalism always has some inherent bias. But to say that the X community is going to be less biased than a fact-checking organization staffed by journalists whose job is to be neutral (within what's humanly possible), is frankly absurd.

Re: Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model

#602

Post by andr »

insane_dreamer wrote: post #592
andr wrote: post #588

I know some of those fact checkers. They are career journalists and the bar to tag a post as disinformation is extremely high. To tag a post, they need to produce several pages of evidence, taking several days of work to research and document. The burden of proof is in every way on the fact checkers, not the random Facebook poster. Generalizing this work as politically biased is a purposeful lie.

Did they even have authority to take down posts? That was always Meta's call. The fact-checkers -- which were separate news orgs -- would tag posts.

Yes, you are right. I believe tagging significantly reduced the chance of seeing the post in your feed, so it was similar in effect.

Re: Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model

#603

Post by insane_dreamer »

aprilthird2021 wrote: post #513
donohoe wrote: post #2

From bad to worse. Meta is probably one of the single largest funders of fact checking. Now that appears to be coming to an end. Third parties will no longer be able to flag misinfo on FB, Instagram or Threads in the US. This is not good imho.

It's ending because the government that encouraged fact checking is ending. The new one has made it clear they despise fact checkers

Right. And you know what type of government really despises fact checkers? Autocratic / oligarchic governments (Russia, China, etc.)

Re: Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model

#604

Post by danpalmer »

stronglikedan wrote: post #309
tshaddox wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> because the word for delay in French is offensive in English It's also the word for delay in English.

It's also not offensive in English, even though some virtue signalers insist on taking offense to it.

Language is what we make of it, it's not a fixed concept. If people take offense to it then it's offensive.

Re: Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model

#605

Post by bsder »

auung wrote: post #597
bsder wrote: post #532

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

[flagged]

Surgery on males for gynecomastia IS classified as a "gender affirming surgery" in the statistics regardless of what you, personally, think.

So, when you see statistics about this, know that that particular operation is almost all of the cases.

Re: Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model

#606

Post by blackeyeblitzar »

insane_dreamer wrote: post #601
blackeyeblitzar wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fact checkers are often wrong, and often corrupted by the activists that end up working at them. For example I’ve repeatedly noticed articles from Politifact that are blatantly wrong or very misleading. When I look up those authors and their other work, their bias is clear. Community notes on X/Twitter is far more effective and accurate.

Yeah, journalism always has some inherent bias. But to say that the X community is going to be less biased than a fact-checking organization staffed by journalists whose job is to be neutral (within what's humanly possible), is frankly absurd.

Why is it absurd? Journalists don’t think their job is to be neutral. They are among the most biased. They abuse the trust given to them, which is why they don't deserve it. Community notes allows a diversity of opinions to compete, which is a better way to seek truth.

Re: Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model

#607

Post by insane_dreamer »

andr wrote: post #602
insane_dreamer wrote: post #592

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did they even have authority to take down posts? That was always Meta's call. The fact-checkers -- which were separate news orgs -- would tag posts.

Yes, you are right. I believe tagging significantly reduced the chance of seeing the post in your feed, so it was similar in effect.

> was similar in effect

Not really. Because if you make the argument that it was censorship then you have to say that any feed that is generated by an algorithm is censorship because the company is determining what, among what all users post, you should see, allowing certain posts to bubble up to the top and others to fall to the bottom.

Re: Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model

#608

Post by jjulius »

sneak wrote: post #461
jjulius wrote: post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm talking less about propaganda and more about the average person's ability to discuss the merits of climate change with one another online.

The average person doesn’t discuss, they repost. The things they repost are propaganda (be it true or untrue).

>The average person doesn’t discuss...

Exactly. We aren't capable of discussing shit online, which is unfortunately where the bulk of our culture's negative discourse is occurring. It's not the posts, even - it's the comment sections.

I don't care if someone shares propaganda, I care about the discussion that happens after they share it, in the comments. When was the last time on FB/IG that you saw someone share some propaganda (true or untrue, doesn't matter), and looked in the comments to find someone correct them, and then the two had a reasoned conversation wherein they traded perspectives and ultimately came to a healthy understanding of one another even if they disagreed?

Do you see that sort of conversation, or do you just see a shitload of people yelling at each other?

Re: Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model

#609

Post by oneeyedpigeon »

jay-barronville wrote: post #480
throw83838445 wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> Community notes are just opinions of random people on internet. No. Community Notes is an open-source peer review-like system but designed in a way to limit bias: When sets of note contributors (the peers in this case) who normally strongly oppose each other’s views on Topic A strongly agree on a point made re Topic A, we’re likely getting closer to the truth.

When you use the term "open-source" in this context, what do you mean?

Re: Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model

#610

Post by threeseed »

abtinf wrote: post #536
threeseed wrote: post #518

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> how about I get to use my critical thinking Because no-one, including you, is an expert on everything. So there will be many topics for which you will not be able to make an informed judgement about the accuracy of the content. And on a social network centred around sharing it can be very easy for inaccuracies to spread.

> Because no-one, including you, is an expert on everything. As I said, god forbid I forget my place and use my mind in the domain of my betters.

You can continue to use your mind.

Pretend that the Community Notes are a conspiracy to rob you of your free will and ignore them.

Post reply on HN