Two Questions To Fix Fake News

R

rgMekanic

[H]ard|News
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
6,943
Last week Facebook announced it was going to implement a system where users would be asked to complete surveys to determine the quality of news postings. Well the survey has been leaked, and it is 2 questions. "Do you recognize the following websites?" And "How much do you trust each of these domains?"

Wow Facebook. I give you the slowest of claps for your thorough efforts to combat fake news. Fortunately for most Facebook users, the questions are multiple choice.

"As part of our ongoing quality surveys, we will now ask people whether they’re familiar with a news source and, if so, whether they trust that source. The idea is that some news organizations are only trusted by their readers or watchers, and others are broadly trusted across society even by those who don’t follow them directly. (We eliminate from the sample those who aren’t familiar with a source, so the output is a ratio of those who trust the source to those who are familiar with it.)" Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook
 
MavericK said:
The root problem is that many people are incapable of discerning what is fake news or not, and instead just distrust any source that says something that doesn't fit their own narrative or worldview.
Click to expand...

What you say is definitely true and I completely agree, but I feel the true root of the problem is that the media has long since become a puppet for whomever pays them the most, whatever is the populist opinion of the day. Most journalists haven't had any kind of integrity for so long now that they've lost all credibility they ever had. I think the last time I felt like I could trust the media was probably 30 years ago. This applies to both "sides" if you can call them that (really there's only one "side"). Most people I speak to out there just ignore most of the news they come across these days.
 
LOL, netiher of you see what 'the problem' is through your pot smoke haze.

There is no entity unbiased enough to be given the awesome power of labeling what is true and what is not, and certainly not the likes of Zuckerberg or Schmidt.

Is this True: "The Russian Collusion investigation has already resulted in indictments"?

Yes, it's an objective truth, but leaving out the part about those indictments being completely unrelated to anything to do with "collusion" leaves the casual reader with the impression collusion was proven. You can lie without ever straying from the facts, just pruning, organizing and presenting them in a deceptive way to intentionally misrepresent a situation.
 
So.. If enough people claim all news sources as untrusted - then all news is fake?

Also, if a "true news source" publicizes one measly biased article written by their newly hired reporter - does it make the entire source untrusted and all other news from "true news source" are fake?

This whole thing looks like a diversion to control what reality people see and live in. The end of the world is near.. :\
 
MavericK said:
The root problem is that many people are incapable of discerning what is fake news or not, and instead just distrust any source that says something that doesn't fit their own narrative or worldview.
Click to expand...

Bingo...we have a winner.

Confirmation bias is a bitch.
 
2 questions eh? That is probably one more than most Facebook users can handle.

You know, seems to me there would not be any fake news if it was not effective, to start with. So the problem is Facebook users take fake news seriously, and now the same users are bing asked if it is fake or not. Uh, yeah,.....brilliant.
 
Well Aristotle said there were 5 stages of government. Democracy was the last stage before anarchy so.....yea....
 
jnemesh said:
Once Trump is impeached, we wont have half the problems with "fake news" as we do now.
Click to expand...

I doubt Trump will be impeached. Besides, this is bigger than one politician. Pandora's box doesn't close so easily. :(
 
"Do you know the difference between news, analysis, and commentary?"

"Are you afraid of being exposed to analysis or commentary that doesn't make you feel good about yourself?"

"Do you understand that different people can view the same facts in different ways?"

Damn I needed three questions.
 
MrDeaf said:
hah... GL with the impeaching part.
Not that I don't think Trump is impeachment worthy, but the vice-president is even worse than Trump.
Click to expand...

so you're telling me there's a chance hillary could still win this thing?

fake news was invented by the MSM.

facebook is stupid and the people on there are too.
 
GlowingGhoul said:
And yet you're perfectly comfortable with the dismissive and condescending statements about "most Facebook users".
Click to expand...

I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about; I made no such comment.

Confirmation bias is a well-documented phenomenon to which we are ALL subject.
 
Master_shake_ said:
if i said i was confused about your reply that would be an understatement.
Click to expand...

Well, that does seem to be a recurring theme on this thread.

But, to clarify: I believe the statement "fake news was invented by the MSM" reveals both your bias and your likely conviction that you have none.

Propaganda (aka "fake news") is nothing new, and it certainly wasn't invented by the media. Obviously the media is sometimes used to spread propaganda, but it should be readily apparent -- given even casual consideration -- that "the MSM" is not a monolithic organization engaged in a conspiracy of deception.
 
Last edited:
bugleyman said:
Well, that does seem to be a recurring theme on this thread.

But, to clarify: I believe the statement "fake news was invented by the MSM" reveals both your bias and your likely conviction that you have none.

Propaganda (aka "fake news") is nothing new, and it certainly wasn't invented by the media. Obviously the media is sometimes used to spread propaganda, but it should be readily apparent -- given even casual consideration -- that "the MSM" is not a monolithic organization engaged in a conspiracy of deception.
Click to expand...

how was propaganda spread before the advent of the internet?

newspapers. who is control of the paper? the media.

how is this wrong?

media is just a means of communication.

and if everyone reads it you are MAINSTREAM.
 
bugleyman said:
I doubt Trump will be impeached. Besides, this is bigger than one politician. Pandora's box doesn't close so easily. :(
Click to expand...


We'll see what happens when he gets in front of Mueller and tries to pull his usually talking (lying) from his face anus. May not even have to prove collusion if they can catch him lying under oath (same reason Clinton was impeached). Since the cheeto can't go more than 5 minutes without his typical verbal diarrhea, I don't see that happening, even with his counsel present. It's a good thing he has money, because he's a lawyers worst nightmare. How many times has he said shit that directly contradicts what they say? Hell they just had to backtrack his comments about talking to Mueller under oath.....
 
Biznatch said:
We'll see what happens when he gets in front of Mueller and tries to pull his usually talking (lying) from his face anus. May not even have to prove collusion if they can catch him lying under oath (same reason Clinton was impeached). Since the cheeto can't go more than 5 minutes without his typical verbal diarrhea, I don't see that happening, even with his counsel present. It's a good thing he has money, because he's a lawyers worst nightmare. How many times has he said shit that directly contradicts what they say? Hell they just had to backtrack his comments about talking to Mueller under oath.....
Click to expand...

Can we not turn yet another thread into a political shit-storm, please?
 
Unlike the old days, young people now aspire to become journalists in order to change the world for the better. Can't we just let news outlets do what they think is best for the masses?

(Being facetious here)
 
bugleyman said:
I doubt Trump will be impeached. Besides, this is bigger than one politician. Pandora's box doesn't close so easily. :(
Click to expand...

Doubt all you want, the pieces are falling into place, and even if he's not impeached, he will be disgraced...and the REST of his group, including McConnell, Ryan, Nunes, Gowdy and the rest WILL be criminally charged. I don't thing The Orange One can provide cover (or pardons) for htem all.
 
MrDeaf said:
hah... GL with the impeaching part.
Not that I don't think Trump is impeachment worthy, but the vice-president is even worse than Trump.
Click to expand...

He's implicated (deeply) too. Dont bet on him taking over.
 
James Angleton of the CIA once said if you want to topple a government, the first two things you have to do is acquire a newspaper and a radio station. Control the "facts" and you can do anything.
 
I think we need to be mindful of the difference between a compromised media and an assault on the very idea of objective fact.
 
otherweeb said:
*Psst* who TF is MSM?

Manson Squad Maulers?
Momentary State Members?
Medium Sized Mothers?
Click to expand...

Mainstream Media (and yes, because mainstream is one word, the acronym makes no sense).

Nowadays it is nearly always used as a dismissive pejorative ("Only fools believe the MSM...good thing *I* know better"). See also: "lamestream media."
 
Biznatch said:
We'll see what happens when he gets in front of Mueller and tries to pull his usually talking (lying) from his face anus. May not even have to prove collusion if they can catch him lying under oath (same reason Clinton was impeached). Since the cheeto can't go more than 5 minutes without his typical verbal diarrhea, I don't see that happening, even with his counsel present. It's a good thing he has money, because he's a lawyers worst nightmare. How many times has he said shit that directly contradicts what they say? Hell they just had to backtrack his comments about talking to Mueller under oath.....
Click to expand...

Someone's been listening to the wrong people again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top