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

The Mark Zuckerberg Manifesto Is a Blueprint for Destroying Journalism

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 209 posts

Re: The Mark Zuckerberg Manifesto Is a Blueprint for Destroying Journalism

#71

Post by zo1 »

RyanZAG wrote: post #3
vinhboy wrote: post #2

> It’s also not Zuckerberg’s responsibility to solve a broken business model in journalism. (One could argue he has a moral imperative to do so, given his position of power, but that’s not the same thing.) That line is pretty much all you need to know about the article, despite what the title is claiming. In my opinion. If anything is destroying journalism, it's the fact that half this country does not care for fact…

> In my opinion. If anything is destroying journalism, it's the fact that half this country does not care for fact vs fiction. Why is this a problem that needs to be solved though? A big part of being free is being able to choose what you get to care about, being able to choose what you get to read, and being able to have your own opinions. Remove that, and you're no longer free. Would it be better to not be a free p…

Because it's uncomfortable to accept. On the one hand, democracy is touted as the perfect system in terms of fairness. But then the intellectuals are not content with letting people choose how the people, their local communities and inspirational leaders have convinced them into voting.

I.e. It becomes about controlling mind-share. Calling something out as "unfair", "biased", "propaganda", or "fake news" is one way of controlling the amount of mind-share it has with people that identify with it. So you can't just "let someone" have their "wrong" opinion, you have to "correct them". That is precisely what political correctness is, it's to "put down" unacceptable opinions with public witch hunts and legal pressure. I have no idea when it went from "leave people alone" with their probably "wrong" opinions, into "omg, you're not allowed to think/say that, you must be sexist/racist/homophobic and we'll make life a living hell for you, and we'll get you fired".

Re: The Mark Zuckerberg Manifesto Is a Blueprint for Destroying Journalism

#72

Post by ykler »

r3bl wrote: post #45
vinhboy wrote: post #2

> It’s also not Zuckerberg’s responsibility to solve a broken business model in journalism. (One could argue he has a moral imperative to do so, given his position of power, but that’s not the same thing.) That line is pretty much all you need to know about the article, despite what the title is claiming. In my opinion. If anything is destroying journalism, it's the fact that half this country does not care for fact…

> it's the fact that half this country does not care for fact vs fiction. I know Facebook is a US-based product and everything, but I'm really getting sick and tired of products that are used all over the world getting adjusted just because they are a problem now in the US. First we had "fake news" (which used to be called just propaganda), which we have dealt with long before Internet was even a big thing in our reg…

My understanding is that "fake news" refers to stories fabricated, often by small-time entrepreneurs, to make money off of Internet ads and typically spread through social media. Propaganda, on the other hand, is biased or fabricated stories promulgated to forward a political agenda, especially by a government or other entity in a position of power. However, the term "fake news" has rapidly been politicized, and a lot of people, especially on the right, have used it to refer simply to biased news and false reports (typically with the implication of insufficient checking). So three really different motives here:

1. Fake news makers are exclusively after money. 2. Propagandists are exclusively after a political end. 3. Journalists are mostly after the truth, even if they are very biased and far from immune from the corrupting influence of money and political ends.

Re: The Mark Zuckerberg Manifesto Is a Blueprint for Destroying Journalism

#73

Post by zo1 »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #7
fatalogic wrote: post #5

I just wish it was easier to find unbiased news. Just a list of facts no slant either way.

Even a list of facts can include bias, by which facts it includes and which it omits. There exists no unbiased source of news. Better to have information, along with documentation of any potential sources of bias, evaluate that for yourself with the caveats included, and give it appropriately discounted weight.

If we take that further, perhaps we need to fix the discoverability and verifiability of facts and statistics.

There needs to be a single store, or repository of it all. Until that happens, news is just a "peek" at something, which will inevitably include bias.

Re: The Mark Zuckerberg Manifesto Is a Blueprint for Destroying Journalism

#74

Post by shriphani »

vinhboy wrote: post #2

> It’s also not Zuckerberg’s responsibility to solve a broken business model in journalism. (One could argue he has a moral imperative to do so, given his position of power, but that’s not the same thing.) That line is pretty much all you need to know about the article, despite what the title is claiming. In my opinion. If anything is destroying journalism, it's the fact that half this country does not care for fact…

"it's the fact that half this country does not care for fact vs fiction."

I posit that this number is close to 95% worldwide.

People are all the same - impulsive and vulnerable. I've spoken to some perfectly normal immigrants from various parts of the world and have heard some properly batshit insane stuff - any other time we would have assigned them a round-the-clock nurse.

And guess what - it makes zero difference to their life what they believe.

Beliefs need to collide with reality (through decisions, actions etc).

Re: The Mark Zuckerberg Manifesto Is a Blueprint for Destroying Journalism

#75

Post by zo1 »

ykler wrote: post #72
r3bl wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's the fact that half this country does not care for fact vs fiction. I know Facebook is a US-based product and everything, but I'm really getting sick and tired of products that are used all over the world getting adjusted just because they are a problem now in the US. First we had "fake news" (which used to be called just propaganda), which we have dealt with long before Internet was even a big thing in our reg…

My understanding is that "fake news" refers to stories fabricated, often by small-time entrepreneurs, to make money off of Internet ads and typically spread through social media. Propaganda, on the other hand, is biased or fabricated stories promulgated to forward a political agenda, especially by a government or other entity in a position of power. However, the term "fake news" has rapidly been politicized, and a lo…

>"and a lot of people, especially on the right, have used it to refer simply to biased news and false reports (typically with the implication of insufficient checking)."

I read a lot of what most would consider "alt-right" news. They've repossessed that term and now use it to refer to really biased reporting on the part of the "mainstream media". The accusation is usually very biased reporting, blatantly favoring left-leaning ideas and politicians, as well as not reporting on issues that contradict the mainstream narrative.

Sometimes they go too-far with conspiracy-theory-level stuff, I'll give them that. But for the most part, they're spot on when it comes to reporting on the mainstream media's blatant left-leaning bias and selective reporting. When I read them, it sounds like a "normal" person, one that doesn't jump through hoops to justify their points. The points are just there.

Re: The Mark Zuckerberg Manifesto Is a Blueprint for Destroying Journalism

#76

Post by arca_vorago »

If you aren't discussing operation mockingbird and the consolidation and monopolization of the parent corps along with the editorial influence that comes with you are nowhere close to understanding the real problem.

Without understanding the real problem, any proposed solution will be lacking.

Re: The Mark Zuckerberg Manifesto Is a Blueprint for Destroying Journalism

#77

Post by amelius »

vinhboy wrote: post #2

> It’s also not Zuckerberg’s responsibility to solve a broken business model in journalism. (One could argue he has a moral imperative to do so, given his position of power, but that’s not the same thing.) That line is pretty much all you need to know about the article, despite what the title is claiming. In my opinion. If anything is destroying journalism, it's the fact that half this country does not care for fact…

> If anything is destroying journalism, it's the fact that half this country does not care for fact vs fiction.

If you simply consider your world to be the other half of the country (that does care about correct news), then there is not much of a problem. If, however, you need to please shareholders, then, yes, you have a problem.

Re: The Mark Zuckerberg Manifesto Is a Blueprint for Destroying Journalism

#79

Post by yummyfajitas »

ykler wrote: post #72
r3bl wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's the fact that half this country does not care for fact vs fiction. I know Facebook is a US-based product and everything, but I'm really getting sick and tired of products that are used all over the world getting adjusted just because they are a problem now in the US. First we had "fake news" (which used to be called just propaganda), which we have dealt with long before Internet was even a big thing in our reg…

My understanding is that "fake news" refers to stories fabricated, often by small-time entrepreneurs, to make money off of Internet ads and typically spread through social media. Propaganda, on the other hand, is biased or fabricated stories promulgated to forward a political agenda, especially by a government or other entity in a position of power. However, the term "fake news" has rapidly been politicized, and a lo…

I don't think this is it. The very concept of fake news is, fundamentally, propaganda.

The mainstream media's privileged position of controlling the narrative is under threat, both from within the media (e.g. Breitbart) and without (random guys on the internet creating narratives).

The idea of "fake news" is propaganda, created in order to push Facebook/Twitter/etc into shutting down the media and random guys that are threatening the mainstream media. It'll probably work too.

Incidentally, insofar as "fake news" is real, it is highly unlikely to have any major effect. ...for fake news to have changed the outcome of the election, a single fake article would need to have had the same persuasive effect as 36 television campaign ads. https://web.stanford.edu/~gentzkow/research/fakenews.pdf

Re: The Mark Zuckerberg Manifesto Is a Blueprint for Destroying Journalism

#80

Post by mrec »

zo1 wrote: post #71
RyanZAG wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In my opinion. If anything is destroying journalism, it's the fact that half this country does not care for fact vs fiction. Why is this a problem that needs to be solved though? A big part of being free is being able to choose what you get to care about, being able to choose what you get to read, and being able to have your own opinions. Remove that, and you're no longer free. Would it be better to not be a free p…

Because it's uncomfortable to accept. On the one hand, democracy is touted as the perfect system in terms of fairness. But then the intellectuals are not content with letting people choose how the people, their local communities and inspirational leaders have convinced them into voting. I.e. It becomes about controlling mind-share. Calling something out as "unfair", "biased", "propaganda", or "fake news" is one way o…

> On the one hand, democracy is touted as the perfect system in terms of fairness.

I don't disagree with your broader point, but I've never ever seen anyone tout democracy as "the perfect system in terms of fairness". Even back when it was the new hotness, writers on it (de Tocqueville et al) were very well aware of its flaws and failure modes.

Post reply on HN