Deleted.
What should we do to you for posting it? Let's start there.
Good point. I've deleted it.
Facebook admits it must do more to stop the spread of misinformation
31–40 of 645 posts
Re: Facebook admits it must do more to stop the spread of misinformation
#32This article criticizes Facebook for firing the human editors that had been keeping things sane. However they were pushed to that by accusations of bias in the right-wing media. Accusations that looked likely to lead to a Congressional investigation. See, for example, http://thehill.com/policy/technology/279361-top-republican-d... . Now they are in a situation where they are damned if they do, damned if they don't. A…
I think a lot of the problem arose because they kept the content editors close to home.
A lot could be solved by just adding people to that department, located across the country in states where they already have offices anyway, or hire editors to work from home. That way, the editorial content wouldn't have to be so biased by region.
Re: Facebook admits it must do more to stop the spread of misinformation
#33Just stop using aggregators. Pay for real news sources that hire actual investigative journalists.
The Ny times has a paid option, they have world class investigative journalism...
Re: Facebook admits it must do more to stop the spread of misinformation
#34This article criticizes Facebook for firing the human editors that had been keeping things sane. However they were pushed to that by accusations of bias in the right-wing media. Accusations that looked likely to lead to a Congressional investigation. See, for example, http://thehill.com/policy/technology/279361-top-republican-d... . Now they are in a situation where they are damned if they do, damned if they don't. A…
Yes, trying to solve this problem by creating a definition of "misinformation" sufficiently precise to act on it for all possible articles, then trying to remove it somehow is probably an AI-complete problem. If it's not AI-complete it's probably just plain an ill-formed question. That's before we ask questions about the biases that get embedded into the misinformation detector. This can't be fixed at Facebook scales…
Yes. We're talking about a platform that at it's best is birthday wishes, vacation and cat pictures. It's running on a paid content model, with advertisers selling through viral videos and click-bait. It's good not to expect too much out of it.
Re: Facebook admits it must do more to stop the spread of misinformation
#35The moderation of Facebook is outsourced to a select group of organizations, not unlike Twitter with their Trust and Safety Council. https://about.twitter.com/safety/council https://blog.twitter.com/2016/announcing-the-twitter-trust-s... Unsurprisingly, Twitter's Safety Council members are predominantly left-leaning with ties to the (now defunct) Clinton campaign. I would presume there are plenty of seats to be fille…
Ah yes, Twitter, the left-leaning echo chamber where alt-right types and racists don't bombard jews and black people constantly with death threats and gas chamber jokes. Free speech has been suppressed so vigorously by the Safety Council :(
(Spoiler alert: Twitter basically doesn't moderate anything and their department responsible for handling abuse reports doesn't do anything)
Re: Facebook admits it must do more to stop the spread of misinformation
#36Ministry of Truth
Re: Facebook admits it must do more to stop the spread of misinformation
#37Re: Facebook admits it must do more to stop the spread of misinformation
#38Wouldn't Facebook have the perverse incentive to define 'misinformation' to be any information which offends the most people, regardless of truth, in order to keep users from leaving
Re: Facebook admits it must do more to stop the spread of misinformation
#39This article criticizes Facebook for firing the human editors that had been keeping things sane. However they were pushed to that by accusations of bias in the right-wing media. Accusations that looked likely to lead to a Congressional investigation. See, for example, http://thehill.com/policy/technology/279361-top-republican-d... . Now they are in a situation where they are damned if they do, damned if they don't. A…
Yes, trying to solve this problem by creating a definition of "misinformation" sufficiently precise to act on it for all possible articles, then trying to remove it somehow is probably an AI-complete problem. If it's not AI-complete it's probably just plain an ill-formed question. That's before we ask questions about the biases that get embedded into the misinformation detector. This can't be fixed at Facebook scales…
Facebook completely controls the presentation priority, no? Bolt a Watson-like truth scoring system on to evaluate content and use the resulting confidence to boost or bury content in other's feeds.
It would absolutely have to be automatically generated, but it doesn't seem impossible (just much harder NLP that Watson playing Jeopardy).
Re: Facebook admits it must do more to stop the spread of misinformation
#40Just stop using aggregators. Pay for real news sources that hire actual investigative journalists.
Real news sources are dead and actual investigative journalists do not exist anymore.
Well that's patently not a true statement. The Guardian, the NY Times, and Der Spiegel are the first three publications that do important investigations that come to mind but they are not alone.
There are a lot of PR plants even in the more reputable newspapers, which is unfortunate, but there are still regular thorough investigations, which I assume are getting harder to do as money and resources continue to shrink.