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

Why Is Facebook So Afraid of Checking Facts?

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 108 posts

Re: Why Is Facebook So Afraid of Checking Facts?

#31

Post by new2628 »

TomMckenny wrote: post #20
dilippkumar wrote: post #10

This article misses a crucial point: I do not want fact checked information. I do not want a ministry of Truth telling me what’s an acceptable set of statements to trust. I do not want a third party providing unsolicited opinions on how much I conform with the acceptable statements a ministry of Truth has blessed for public use. I’ll provide three arguments. First, how will Facebook or any other entity that takes on…

So the enormously popular post telling parents to make their kids drink Lysol should not have even the slightest warning next to it because the poster could be like Galileo or Einstein?

You are not arguing in good faith. You are making a caricature of the opposing argument, presenting in the worst light possible.

Re: Why Is Facebook So Afraid of Checking Facts?

#32

Post by protonfish »

new2628 wrote: post #16
dilippkumar wrote: post #10

This article misses a crucial point: I do not want fact checked information. I do not want a ministry of Truth telling me what’s an acceptable set of statements to trust. I do not want a third party providing unsolicited opinions on how much I conform with the acceptable statements a ministry of Truth has blessed for public use. I’ll provide three arguments. First, how will Facebook or any other entity that takes on…

This is an excellent summary, and I fully agree with it. As a modest addition: - In many important cases, there is no fact, just differing viewpoints and opinions. One man's terrorist is another one's freedom fighter. Violent insurgency for one, legitimate fight for liberty and justice for the other. In fact, reasonable people will even disagree on whether in some topic there are facts or only opinions, let alone abo…

If you honestly believe there is no objective truth, then there is no value in anything you say. Please stop posting anything ever again.

Re: Why Is Facebook So Afraid of Checking Facts?

#33

Post by xienze »

kick wrote: post #14
dilippkumar wrote: post #10

This article misses a crucial point: I do not want fact checked information. I do not want a ministry of Truth telling me what’s an acceptable set of statements to trust. I do not want a third party providing unsolicited opinions on how much I conform with the acceptable statements a ministry of Truth has blessed for public use. I’ll provide three arguments. First, how will Facebook or any other entity that takes on…

...and you go to Facebook for your scientific and world news? Facebook is a toy. Relying on a platform with a built-in way to reply to posts with nothing more than a laugh-cry-smiley to deliver you accurate news in the first place is ridiculous. They could never be a Ministry of Truth or whatever you're implying, because it's a toy. If they want to fact-check posts on their site, it changes literally nothing of impor…

> They could never be a Ministry of Truth or whatever you're implying, because it's a toy.

Well apparently not, politicians the world over are frightened of Facebook’s potential for spreading misinformation. Recall that the 2016 presidential election was apparently turned via $100K of Facebook ads that had little or nothing to do with the candidates in question.

Re: Why Is Facebook So Afraid of Checking Facts?

#34

Post by oarabbus_ »

dingaling wrote: post #27
oarabbus_ wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Facebook is a toy. A toy, is that so? I know quite a number of people (engineers, marketers, companies) that exist solely due to Facebook advertising. You should let them know their livelihood rests on a toy. >...and you go to Facebook for your scientific and world news? Why do you frame it as some ludicrous idea? Is this more preposterous than getting your science and world news from an email chain, or from Fox/CNN…

> You should let them know their livelihood rests on a toy. There is an entire global industry of physical toys. Many targeted at adults. Facebook is only different in that it exists in the non-physical domain. It's still a pass-time toy.

You're right that many people's livelihoods depend on toys, but it's a social network, not a toy. Are netflix twitter and google time pass toys? Hacker News must be a toy/social media site too, then. All social media sites are toys, then?

You know as well as I do that the commenter I responded to attempted to use "Facebook is a toy" as a disparaging remark; this is an unnecessary semantics debate I won't continue further.

Re: Why Is Facebook So Afraid of Checking Facts?

#35

Post by [deleted] »

thisisnico wrote: post #4
dadarepublic wrote: post #3

From what I gathered FTA it sounds like the author is putting forth the notion that Facebook is relying on old, mostly debunked theories around a "backfire effect" - when fact-checking increases polarization and results in the opposite of the intent of the fact-check. The author then goes on to discuss how more recent studies (including their own research) and even some of the original authors of that pervious resear…

Facebook would be so much better with fact-checking. It seriously would improve the state of the world.

[deleted]

Re: Why Is Facebook So Afraid of Checking Facts?

#36

Post by protonfish »

lucidone wrote: post #29

Only allowing "true" information on any platform (or in any form of discourse, really) is effectively impossible given the subjective nature of truth. Philosophers have spent their lives arguing this topic, a tech giant isn't about to answer that question.

Agreed there is no guaranteed way to only allow truth. However, there are many easy ways to remove utter nonsense. Maybe we should start with that and see how it goes.

Re: Why Is Facebook So Afraid of Checking Facts?

#37

Post by TomMckenny »

new2628 wrote: post #31
TomMckenny wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the enormously popular post telling parents to make their kids drink Lysol should not have even the slightest warning next to it because the poster could be like Galileo or Einstein?

You are not arguing in good faith. You are making a caricature of the opposing argument, presenting in the worst light possible.

I'm pointing out a problem with a real post that actually exists right at this very moment.

Re: Why Is Facebook So Afraid of Checking Facts?

#38

Post by rwmj »

dilippkumar wrote: post #10

This article misses a crucial point: I do not want fact checked information. I do not want a ministry of Truth telling me what’s an acceptable set of statements to trust. I do not want a third party providing unsolicited opinions on how much I conform with the acceptable statements a ministry of Truth has blessed for public use. I’ll provide three arguments. First, how will Facebook or any other entity that takes on…

You are missing the whole point. Facebook (and Youtube etc) do not simply show you all opinions in the world at the same time with equal weight. They select things for you to view based on your prior interactions with the website. So they can emphasize and deemphasize articles and videos to show you next. Across their entire userbase selecting articles that are based in reality will have a large effect.

Re: Why Is Facebook So Afraid of Checking Facts?

#39

Post by ummonk »

okintheory wrote: post #15

It seems to me that there's an obvious alternative to checking facts, but it's one that scares FB much more than fact checking. Suppose they were transparent! Suppose it was easy to see unobfuscated statistics about who is paying for what on FB. Suppose journalists could easily look up how much white nationalists are spending on targeted advertising in each US state. Suppose we could see how much Exxon, Chevron, Koch…

https://www.facebook.com/ads/library/ has most of what you’re asking for I believe.

Re: Why Is Facebook So Afraid of Checking Facts?

#40

Post by kauffj »

dilippkumar wrote: post #10

This article misses a crucial point: I do not want fact checked information. I do not want a ministry of Truth telling me what’s an acceptable set of statements to trust. I do not want a third party providing unsolicited opinions on how much I conform with the acceptable statements a ministry of Truth has blessed for public use. I’ll provide three arguments. First, how will Facebook or any other entity that takes on…

Yes yes yes. I am saving this comment I can quote it again in the future.

The development of any number of now widely accepted truths went through periods where they were viewed incredibly skeptically.

It's inconceivable to me that anyone could even want to _have_ the argument of wanting a central censor again. Haven't we already had this battle enough times? Is the evidence not incontrovertible that societies where people are free to speak and exchange ideas are better than societies that are not?

It's rational, I think, to want our software to offer warnings and controls that let us, _as individuals_, choose to hide, filter, or shrink-wrap certain information. Completely surrendering that trust to someone else is utterly insane.

P.S. I'm the CEO of LBRY, and this stance is pretty core to what we do. Email me at jeremy@lbry.com if you want to say hi.

Post reply on HN