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

Facebook to Let Users Rank Credibility of News

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 239 posts

Re: Facebook to Let Users Rank Credibility of News

#101

Post by lawlessone »

RealGeek wrote: post #91
themagician wrote: post #16

This is the opposite of what they should have done. Shows just how much of an echo-chamber Facebook has become. This is just adding another metric by which garbage can be made legitimate and vice versa. Facebook would be a much better platform if they removed the like and comment count from every post. It’s those numbers that lead people to believe that garbage is legitimate in the first place. By hiding these number…

There is no likes and views count on Whatsapp, but the fake news problem is much worse on Whatsapp than Facebook and YouTube.

Can you explain this? maybe it's because of the filter bubble i live in but i almost never see this on whatsapp (then again, maybe i wouldn't know if i had.)

Re: Facebook to Let Users Rank Credibility of News

#102

Post by matt4077 »

skate22 wrote: post #89

A fraction of revenue from popular pages should fund a manual fact checking process that either temporarily grants or denies that page a trusted status.

People don't care about "fact checking". The NYT, or the Wall Street Journal's newsrooms simply don't make factual errors, except occasionally spelling someone's name wrong, Nobody cares.

Re: Facebook to Let Users Rank Credibility of News

#103

Post by fortythirteen »

0x7f800000 wrote: post #11
emodendroket wrote: post #8

This is a frankly awful idea. I do not want Facebook acting as some sort of arbiter of what information is truthful. The cure is worse than the disease.

This is worse than that. Imagine your Trump-supporting extended family voting down CNN news stories as "not credible." Expect mass brigading by The_Donald.

The problem isn't that simple. Most mainstream news, including CNN, have traded in objective reporting for idealogical dissemination. You can very often, legitimately call CNN "not credible". Just in the last couple years they have:

1. Told their viewers that it was illegal to read the DNC emails leaked to Wikileaks themselves, and to just listen to what CNN has to say about them.

2. Got caught posing one of their cameramen as a protester/rioter for an interview about why he was "in the streets".

3. Deceptively edited a video of Trump dumping fish food into a koi pond to omit the fact that he was following the Japanese PM's lead, then spent a whole day talking about how disrespectful it was.

4. Spent a whole morning talking about how Trump drinks diet coke, while there was an active terrorist attack in NY.

That's just what I pulled off the top of my head, too.

Edit: to the user that downvoted my comment: which of the four bullet points was false? It's easy to protect the liars who benefit our goals. It takes intellectual honesty to criticize one's allies.

Re: Facebook to Let Users Rank Credibility of News

#104

Post by [deleted] »

y0ghur7_xxx wrote: post #80
yAnonymous wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you really want to fight the root of the problem, it's not likes and comments, but education. Should we censor social media, because people are too stupid to deal with it? I don't think so and if you do, you're playing in the hands of corporations who want a cheap work force. Your "solution" isn't a solution, but a hot fix that will cause more damage in the future. It's exactly the shortsighted crap politics are t…

> If you really want to fight the root of the problem, it's not likes and comments, but education. I agree, but it's impossible to educate everyone on any subject. I think in this case, people who are experts in the matter, should give a reputation rating on the article. That would be really great. For example, I am no expert in theoretical physics, but I may enjoy an article about it, but how do I know it's not a bu…

[deleted]

Re: Facebook to Let Users Rank Credibility of News

#105

Post by MBCook »

emodendroket wrote: post #66
MBCook wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? Here’s a paper (PDF) showing some of the most active & influential #BlackLivesMatter tweeters were linked to Russia. On BOTH SIDES. http://faculty.washington.edu/kstarbi/examining-trolls-polar... This matches similar research I saw in the last few days on some other political topic (can’t remember which) were some of the most important and active tweeters were Russian on both sides. Russia wasn’t trying to ge…

Certainly people on both sides were accused of that but the idea that Black Lives Matter was actually just a Russian plot is frankly pretty repellent, and that paper in the end just defers to Twitter's ideas of who's a Russian troll, and how did they decide? We've seen a lot of really shoddy work in this department.

No, I’m not saying it was a Russian plot at all. It’s a real thing.

I’m saying they seized on it as something they could use to push division between people.

Re: Facebook to Let Users Rank Credibility of News

#106

Post by 7granddad »

themagician wrote: post #16

This is the opposite of what they should have done. Shows just how much of an echo-chamber Facebook has become. This is just adding another metric by which garbage can be made legitimate and vice versa. Facebook would be a much better platform if they removed the like and comment count from every post. It’s those numbers that lead people to believe that garbage is legitimate in the first place. By hiding these number…

I think an interesting way Facebook could approach determining credibility would be by having users bet (betting with some made up points instead of real money). Since this forces readers to speculate, it would encourage critically reading the articles. I think a betting system would push Facebook less in the direction of an echo-chamber. The difficulty with applying a betting system is that it still doesn't tell you whether the information is true, thus bets can't be evaluated.

Re: Facebook to Let Users Rank Credibility of News

#107

Post by sanmon3186 »

lawlessone wrote: post #101
RealGeek wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no likes and views count on Whatsapp, but the fake news problem is much worse on Whatsapp than Facebook and YouTube.

Can you explain this? maybe it's because of the filter bubble i live in but i almost never see this on whatsapp (then again, maybe i wouldn't know if i had.)

The fact that Facebook walls are visible to everyone, any controversial topic usually gets reaction from both sides. Whatsapp groups are formed based on likemindedness (I am excluding core family and friends). I call these groups echo-pipes which silently form a larger echo chamber.

Re: Facebook to Let Users Rank Credibility of News

#108

Post by dagw »

fortythirteen wrote: post #103
0x7f800000 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is worse than that. Imagine your Trump-supporting extended family voting down CNN news stories as "not credible." Expect mass brigading by The_Donald.

The problem isn't that simple. Most mainstream news, including CNN, have traded in objective reporting for idealogical dissemination. You can very often, legitimately call CNN "not credible". Just in the last couple years they have: 1. Told their viewers that it was illegal to read the DNC emails leaked to Wikileaks themselves, and to just listen to what CNN has to say about them. 2. Got caught posing one of their ca…

to the user that downvoted my comment: which of the four bullet points was false?

Didn't downvote (and I don't have CNN), but your complete lack of links to back up any of the things you mentioned makes it very hard to judge if they're actually true or false.

Re: Facebook to Let Users Rank Credibility of News

#109

Post by fortythirteen »

dagw wrote: post #108
fortythirteen wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem isn't that simple. Most mainstream news, including CNN, have traded in objective reporting for idealogical dissemination. You can very often, legitimately call CNN "not credible". Just in the last couple years they have: 1. Told their viewers that it was illegal to read the DNC emails leaked to Wikileaks themselves, and to just listen to what CNN has to say about them. 2. Got caught posing one of their ca…

to the user that downvoted my comment: which of the four bullet points was false? Didn't downvote (and I don't have CNN), but your complete lack of links to back up any of the things you mentioned makes it very hard to judge if they're actually true or false.

I was under the assumption that most of these were well known. Links:

* "‘Remember, it’s illegal to possess’ WikiLeaks Clinton emails, but ‘it’s different for the media,’ says CNN’s Chris Cuomo": https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201...

Fake protester is a CNN cameraman: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s57pKCRcuF4

* Snopes: An image showing President Trump dumping fish food into a koi pond was shared with misleading statements about his behavior: https://www.snopes.com/did-trump-impatiently-dump-fish-food-...

* "CNN mocked for airing segment on Trump's soda consumption while NYC faced terror attack": http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2017/12/11/cnn-mocked-f...

Re: Facebook to Let Users Rank Credibility of News

#110

Post by mythrwy »

marenkay wrote: post #81

Why not remove anything except from social interaction from FB instead of this? IMHO anything on FB beyond connecting with people is worthless anyway and mostly driven by bots and not people these days.

That is the real answer. Facebook and news are two separate phenomenon. Or at least they should be.
Post reply on HN