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

Facebook Is a 'Super Spreader' of Election Misinformation

newsweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 150 posts

Re: Facebook Is a 'Super Spreader' of Election Misinformation

#101

Post by daniellarusso »

rendall wrote: post #41
unmdplyr wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's possible. I know for certain there are techniques to identify "click-baity" text snippets. My partner is currently working on a data model now and she has already had some reasonable success. Imagine what a company that hires several 10s or even 100s of data scientists can achieve? From there on, it's just a matter of highlighting these successful matches constantly in your feeds. I wouldn't put it past…

Interesting idea. I see 2 potential problems. If the approach would be content-neutral - i.e. simply relying on the form of the information (eg misspellings in the title, many exclamation points, and such) to distinguish that which is more likely to be fake - then there could be a race condition where the misinformation purveyors learn and subvert the algorithm followed by the misinformation identifier incorporating…

You compared to SEO, but I was thinking about email spam filtering.

Some of the best spammers have better practices than the legitimate companies sending email.

Re: Facebook Is a 'Super Spreader' of Election Misinformation

#102

Post by gusfoo »

sgdesign wrote: post #7

One thing I still don’t quite understand is how a system like this one can develop when the people developing it almost certainly are completely opposed to these ideas on a personal political level. I almost feel like it was an excess of idealism and belief in “the free market of ideas” -as well as the idea that Facebook should remain a neutral party at all cost- that led to overcompensating in the wrong direction, a…

> One thing I still don’t quite understand is how a system like this one can develop when the people developing it almost certainly are completely opposed to these ideas on a personal political level.

It is, as they say, giving people what they want. People get genuine pleasure from the feeling of outrage and, better still, righteous anger. And creators of content get paid by the ad industry more from outraging people than drily informing them of the fact of the matter.

Re: Facebook Is a 'Super Spreader' of Election Misinformation

#103

Post by LarvaFX »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #20
Dansvidania wrote: post #13

People spread misinformation on Facebook. Arguably, it's not Facebook's responsibility to fact-check anything. Facebook is not a publishing house (at least not the Facebook social media platform as such) and mandating that they fact check and curate their ads and content is tricky business. It requires a legal definition of truth, which is a matter complex enough to justify the existence of the whole judiciary system…

> Facebook is not a publishing house Social media is a sufficiently different form of media that it will require its own form of regulation. Pointing to the publisher-editor delineation is anachronistic. Publishers never had the reach, insidiousness and information velocity that Facebook does.

Thank you for this insight.

Re: Facebook Is a 'Super Spreader' of Election Misinformation

#104

Post by zimpenfish »

albertTJames wrote: post #69
jackric wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was there pre 2016 it just didn't have this catchy term "fake news" yet. Ever heard of Gell-Mann Amnesia?

Do you have any example ?

"Misinformation and the 2010 Election: A Study of the US Electorate"

https://drum.lib.umd.edu/bitstream/handle/1903/11375/Misinfo...

Re: Facebook Is a 'Super Spreader' of Election Misinformation

#105

Post by LatteLazy »

People spread this stuff. Organised funded groups from Fox news down to your local corporate or office push it. Facebook is just where they do it. At worst, Facebook encourages people stay on Facebook, but it doesn't care whether they're sharing trump memes or kittens.

This is like blaming parks because people deal drugs in parks sometimes.

Re: Facebook Is a 'Super Spreader' of Election Misinformation

#106

Post by jen20 »

LatteLazy wrote: post #105

People spread this stuff. Organised funded groups from Fox news down to your local corporate or office push it. Facebook is just where they do it. At worst, Facebook encourages people stay on Facebook, but it doesn't care whether they're sharing trump memes or kittens. This is like blaming parks because people deal drugs in parks sometimes.

In many cities, parks close at dusk in part because people deal drugs there, so this argument is not remotely convincing.

Re: Facebook Is a 'Super Spreader' of Election Misinformation

#107

Post by MrMan »

Dansvidania wrote: post #13

People spread misinformation on Facebook. Arguably, it's not Facebook's responsibility to fact-check anything. Facebook is not a publishing house (at least not the Facebook social media platform as such) and mandating that they fact check and curate their ads and content is tricky business. It requires a legal definition of truth, which is a matter complex enough to justify the existence of the whole judiciary system…

Facebook is strictly a tool for social control, run for profit.

Re: Facebook Is a 'Super Spreader' of Election Misinformation

#108

Post by GuB-42 »

ako wrote: post #96
Broken_Hippo wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So... I shouldn't talk to family overseas during this time or find another way to do it? Or everyone not living in the US should not have facebook before an American election? It would seem to be more prudent to disallow political ads the week before. Or make it a crime to, say, spread wrong information about voting. And so on.

Since when is your ability to talk to your family depending on facebook. What about email, phone calls, or a zoom call?

Facebook wouldn't be so powerful if switching means of communication was so easy.

It is possible, but email doesn't offer real time communication, phone calls can be expensive, and not everyone knows how or wants to use zoom. Getting the family, including both grandma and kids to switch is hard "why isn't it working like it did before?".

And BTW, to Facebook, Google and everyone else. Stop messing with the fucking UI. For most of us, keeping up with redesigns is often just a minor annoyance. But to older non-technical people, it is awful.

Re: Facebook Is a 'Super Spreader' of Election Misinformation

#109

Post by eloisius »

op03 wrote: post #100
eloisius wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And Facebook has changed the landscape of journalism to favor drive-by clickbait journalism. Does the riverbed guide the river or did the river carve out the riverbed?

The EPA has something called a Dose-Response Curve. Depending on what's being dumped in the river the polluter can be thrown in jail, the govt can be sued, the river can be closed off etc etc But what helps in determining damage is the curve. On all kinds of chemicals. Right now when Facebook allows ppl to swim in info sewage no one knows what the dose - response is. There is no EPA.

I like your analogy. Maybe it's because I'm older than last time I cared about something this much, but this time I really don't have a solution that's consistent with any ideology that I have. For most of my adult life, I've leaned towards libertarian. I don't see the free market solving this one very well. I'm also skeptical of a government-sponsored ministry of truth, though. I'm at a loss for how to "fix" the effects of social media without causing far more damage with censorship. The closest stop-gap sort of damage control I can think of is to do everything possible to remove any barriers in the way of enabling private citizens to sue for damages when social media companies publish harmful material.

Re: Facebook Is a 'Super Spreader' of Election Misinformation

#110

Post by LatteLazy »

jen20 wrote: post #106
LatteLazy wrote: post #105

People spread this stuff. Organised funded groups from Fox news down to your local corporate or office push it. Facebook is just where they do it. At worst, Facebook encourages people stay on Facebook, but it doesn't care whether they're sharing trump memes or kittens. This is like blaming parks because people deal drugs in parks sometimes.

In many cities, parks close at dusk in part because people deal drugs there, so this argument is not remotely convincing.

Because people never deal drugs during the day or because people never go into parks at night when they're shut!?
Post reply on HN