I think that news and advertising is too powerful to be in private hands. All major news and advertising sources should be nationalized or turned into non-profits.
Facebook admits it must do more to stop the spread of misinformation
511–520 of 645 posts
Re: Facebook admits it must do more to stop the spread of misinformation
#512ministry of truth'd
Re: Facebook admits it must do more to stop the spread of misinformation
#513Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry. Most of the official sources in this recent campaign were dead wrong on a lot of issues, mostly because of their own massive biases.
The polls were not that far off. If 1 in 100 Trump voters had gone for Clinton instead she would have won. I think polling is pretty broken though. A lot has changed from 20 years ago when everyone had a landline phone.
The polls were off by the same percentage amount that would have allowed Romney to win the popular vote over Obama.
Re: Facebook admits it must do more to stop the spread of misinformation
#514Re: Facebook admits it must do more to stop the spread of misinformation
#515Earlier quoted context omitted.
>we have to find some other reason for why EVERYONE ELSE, was completely WRONG >and the people have spoken Trump lost the popular vote, so this isn't true. He got about 25% of the total voting population overall.
I agree that just because Trump won the election doesn't mean the people gave him a mandate, or have spoken, but looking at popular vote in a system that doesn't even focus on popular vote is incorrect IMO. If the rules were to get popular vote then campaigning would be done totally differently. The candidates are doing everything they can to win states, not win popular vote.
Regarding popular election, "mandate" and "only 25% voted for him", it seems that all people who are now dissatisfied have voted for Clinton. Which suggests that the 50% who didn't vote maybe don't oppose Trump that much.
I observed that leftists have a tendency to systematically overestimate their numbers, influence and the amount of agreement or even familiarity with their ideas among the public.
Re: Facebook admits it must do more to stop the spread of misinformation
#516Re: Facebook admits it must do more to stop the spread of misinformation
#517Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a problem with human wetware - there are several cognitive biases [1][2][3][4] that make people engage more strongly with ideas that fit their preconceptions and discount ideas that don't. Add information-sharing to the mix and the aggregate effect you get is large information cascades that fracture the population into tribes that believe things not necessarily because they're true, but because they are state…
As any alien arriving in your world would immediately ask, why doesn't having a true representation of the world help you survive and gain status? And if it doesn't, why does it matter?
It helps me gain status even more if I can plant false information in others.
Re: Facebook admits it must do more to stop the spread of misinformation
#518Itt: people who think the world is dominated by unequivocal ideas and information.
Re: Facebook admits it must do more to stop the spread of misinformation
#519This 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…
The solution is simple, stop being gullible and stupid trusting things you hear or read without something credible to back it up.
Facebook has it's own bias, most people do. Some professional reviewers and political commentators try to be as unbiased as humanly possible, but why blindly trust them, even if that's their intention, there is nothing that say they cannot just be factually wrong.
Re: Facebook admits it must do more to stop the spread of misinformation
#520Earlier quoted context omitted.
> lead to a Congressional investigation. That really seems like "abridging the freedom of speech" to me. Constitutional conservatives sure love pushing the limits of the constitution when it inconveniences them. But, you know, the election is over so now that the right has total control we must all put aside our differences and work together.
It is kind of Orwellian to claim an investigation of suppression of speech is "abridging the freedom of speech." Nonetheless, it isn't the government's business, what Facebook does with its feed, and constitutional conservatives should recognize that. http://thehill.com/policy/technology/279498-some-conservativ...
You don't have freedom of speech in Facebook, if Facebook doesn't want you to, it's their platform...
They may lose credibility doing that, and would be a worse place to discuss things, but that is up them unless you have some kind of contract with them that makes you entitled to something else.
That for me is the main problem, people just want to trust stuff blindly and get all jived up when that doesn't work. You're mad at your own stupidity folks.