Facebook, Twitter Join Network To Tackle Fake News

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
The two largest platforms for fake news are now banding together with over thirty news and technology companies to help cut down on fake news. Damn, this sucks. Where are we supposed to get our daily fake "(insert celebrity) has died" news now?

First Draft Coalition, formed in June 2015 with the backing of Alphabet Inc's Google, said it would create a voluntary code of practice, promote news literacy among social media users, and launch a platform where members can verify questionable news stories. The platform will be launched by the end of October, Jenni Sargent, managing director of the coalition, said in an email.

 
So the same people who sign up that it's OK for a UN based organization to manage the internet ALSO band together to tell us what is valid and what is not? Nothing to see here, folks. Move along...
 
What about the onion news? I thought that was the only fake news?
 
jpm100 said:
Fake news like Hillary is in perfect health? Or fake news like something's going on there that's not being said?

You don't call the propaganda board the propaganda board, you call it the 'ministry of truth'.
Click to expand...
The fake news like, if you don't have concrete facts about something just don't fucking say anything. How hard is that to understand?
 
It would be great if there were some sort of FAKE flair or flag on reposts/retweets of fake stories. An even better step would be to retroactively email those who had shared stories prior to them being uncovered as fakes.

As vapid as we like to pretend people are, most people really are actively engaged in the world around them. It would do society a great service to ensure people were at least aware when they were spending their time discussing something fake or passing around false information.
 
It's kind of sad that they have to do this.

Any person above the age of 12 ought to have enough common sense to consider the source when reading news.
 
natos said:
What about the onion news? I thought that was the only fake news?
Click to expand...

There is a difference between satire and trying to pass off incorrect information as real news.

Though judging by comments apparently a significant number of people don't seem to understand that the likes of The Onion and Clickhole are satirical publications, which is actually pretty funny.

I don't understand how people go through life which such poor satire, sarcasm and scam radars.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
It's kind of sad that they have to do this.

Any person above the age of 12 ought to have enough common sense to consider the source when reading news.
Click to expand...

And yet for the most part they don't. I think common sense is a foreign concept to at least 50-75% of the general population.

Just look at how people act, what they sue over, what they complain about, what bogus "causes" they support, who they vote for, etc.
 
Powerage said:
The fake news like, if you don't have concrete facts about something just don't fucking say anything. How hard is that to understand?
Click to expand...
There is a trend in news organizations today to say "not independently verified" in an attempt to get more views and to cover their asses if the story isn't true. Even "credible" sources like the AP are guilty of doing this.
Zarathustra[H] said:
There is a difference between satire and trying to pass off incorrect information as real news.

Though judging by comments apparently a significant number of people don't seem to understand that the likes of The Onion and Clickhole are satirical publications, which is actually pretty funny.

I don't understand how people go through life which such poor satire, sarcasm and scam radars.
Click to expand...
Extending from my above reply, "credible" news outlets have been guilty of using The Onion as a source before. Hell, 4chan and Reddit are often cited in this day and age. I think it has become a game on Reddit now to post something that is fake to see if any news outlets will pick it up as a story.
 
Armenius said:
There is a trend in news organizations today to say "not independently verified" in an attempt to get more views and to cover their asses if the story isn't true. Even "credible" sources like the AP are guilty of doing this.

Extending from my above reply, "credible" news outlets have been guilty of using The Onion as a source before. Hell, 4chan and Reddit are often cited in this day and age. I think it has become a game on Reddit now to post something that is fake to see if any news outlets will pick it up as a story.
Click to expand...
It is very profitable to get any story picked up by the media. It's not a game, it's a business.
 
DarkStar02 said:
It is very profitable to get any story picked up by the media. It's not a game, it's a business.
Click to expand...
Their loss, then. Because I have stopped watching and reading everything but my local news due to their bullshit.
 
Yeah, the fake news articles are gettin out of hand. Wouldn't be too awful if some people actually didn't believe some of those fake articles lol.
 
Getting your news from Fakebook is like getting your news from the lady at the laundromat.
 
Guess the only news articles that will be shown on FB and Twitter are from the First Draft Coalition (New York Times, Washington Post, BuzzFeed News, Agence France-Presse and CNN) come the end of October. All others will probably be considered fake.
 
amddragonpc said:
Guess the only news articles that will be shown on FB and Twitter are from the First Draft Coalition (New York Times, Washington Post, BuzzFeed News, Agence France-Presse and CNN) come the end of October. All others will probably be considered fake.
Click to expand...


I wouldn't mind if all news stories had to pass a bipartisan fact check before appearing online. That way we might wind up with less made up propaganda like they always broadcast on Fox News. That being said, with Ailes gone, maybe Fox news will improve. Who knows. Would be nice to have a factual conservative counter-point, rather than just a verbal diarrhea outlet.
 
Monkey God said:
Fox News is not the only ones who do this. CNN and MSNBC are Democratic party propaganda ministries.
Click to expand...

There is no doubt that MSNBC (and to a lesser extent CNN) have editorial slants. Every publication/channel does, because the media are made up of people and people have biases. It is impossible for a person to be unbiased regarding almost anything.

You are right, MSNBC is very much like Fox News, and there is a reason for that. They saw the Fox news model and how it worked, and tried to copy it, but for the left instead of the right. IMHO, they belong in the same category of frequently playing fast and loose with the facts in order to score political points.

The whole "Liberal media" thing - however - is as fake now as it was when it originally sprung onto the debate scene back in the 80's. It was fabricated in order to make conservatives feel like victims and drive them out to vote.

Most media outlets, while they have a slight editorial slant (many leftward, but some rightward too like the Wall Street Journal, and modern Washington Post) still keep to the facts though. They may interpret said facts differently based on their editorial slant, but the facts are still the facts. Sometimes there have been isolated cases of mistakes being made, but in general for most publications, they have been quickly retracted and fixed.

Fox news is in a class all of its own for its willingness to just completely make up whatever suits them at the moment to try to drive a political point, without any regard for what is factual at all. A couple of examples include Obamacare has Death Panels, Obama is a Kenyan born Muslim.

It's one thing to have a editorial slant while reporting on the facts. It is human. We all have "editorial" slants. it's another to completely make up stories repeatedly on the same side of every issue to try to sway important political issues. Fox News has been in a class of their own here. MSNBC have tried to mimic their style, but they just haven't been able to as brazenly pull off outright intentional lies as Fox has.
 
Powerage said:
The fake news like, if you don't have concrete facts about something just don't fucking say anything. How hard is that to understand?
Click to expand...

Fake news like, the Obama administration paying Iran (the leading state sponsor of terror) 400 million dollars in hard European currency for hostages? That kind of fake news?
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
I wouldn't mind if all news stories had to pass a bipartisan fact check before appearing online. That way we might wind up with less made up propaganda like they always broadcast on Fox News. That being said, with Ailes gone, maybe Fox news will improve. Who knows. Would be nice to have a factual conservative counter-point, rather than just a verbal diarrhea outlet.
Click to expand...

Rush Limbaugh - current accuracy rating is at 99.8% I believe.
 
Mugato said:
Fake news like, the Obama administration paying Iran (the leading state sponsor of terror) 400 million dollars in hard European currency for hostages? That kind of fake news?
Click to expand...

Yep, that is patently false misreporting of two separate events, long since agreed upon that happened to happen at the same time.

Anyone who would even have bothered to scratch the surface on the issue would have known that, and not reported it in that manner. Instead they - and their believers - just wind up looking like Mel Gibson in Conspiracy Theory.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
There is no doubt that MSNBC (and to a lesser extent CNN) have editorial slants. Every publication/channel does, because the media are made up of people and people have biases. It is impossible for a person to be unbiased regarding almost anything.

You are right, MSNBC is very much like Fox News, and there is a reason for that. They saw the Fox news model and how it worked, and tried to copy it, but for the left instead of the right. IMHO, they belong in the same category of frequently playing fast and loose with the facts in order to score political points.

The whole "Liberal media" thing - however - is as fake now as it was when it originally sprung onto the debate scene back in the 80's. It was fabricated in order to make conservatives feel like victims and drive them out to vote.

Most media outlets, while they have a slight editorial slant (many leftward, but some rightward too like the Wall Street Journal, and modern Washington Post) still keep to the facts though. They may interpret said facts differently based on their editorial slant, but the facts are still the facts. Sometimes there have been isolated cases of mistakes being made, but in general for most publications, they have been quickly retracted and fixed.

Fox news is in a class all of its own for its willingness to just completely make up whatever suits them at the moment to try to drive a political point, without any regard for what is factual at all. A couple of examples include Obamacare has Death Panels, Obama is a Kenyan born Muslim.

It's one thing to have a editorial slant while reporting on the facts. It is human. We all have "editorial" slants. it's another to completely make up stories repeatedly on the same side of every issue to try to sway important political issues. Fox News has been in a class of their own here. MSNBC have tried to mimic their style, but they just haven't been able to as brazenly pull off outright intentional lies as Fox has.
Click to expand...

You mean like how CNN and the other "mainstream" media doesn't cover anything negative about Democrats but tries to destroy Republicans, even if they have to twist words, edit clips, and outright make up crap?

And then if they get something completely and blatantly wrong, they either will not say anything.. or in the case of newspapers will maybe sort-of print a redaction notice on a page somewhere in the middle.. when the original story was front page news?

I used to watch some CNN, MSNBC, etc. Got tired of their complete crap so I stopped. I don't watch FOX either as they are generally a bunch of idiots as well.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
Yep, that is patently false misreporting of two separate events, long since agreed upon that happened to happen at the same time.

Anyone who would even have bothered to scratch the surface on the issue would have known that, and not reported it in that manner. Instead they - and their believers - just wind up looking like Mel Gibson in Conspiracy Theory.
Click to expand...

Except that in Conspiracy Theory, he was pretty much 100% correct.
 
Mugato said:
Fake news like, the Obama administration paying Iran (the leading state sponsor of terror) 400 million dollars in hard European currency for hostages? That kind of fake news?
Click to expand...
I love how all I mentioned was news following facts and you get all pissed off about Obama and shit. Way to draw a correlation there. I'm not going to spend my time arguing with someone who has 1) already made up their mind and 2) is obviously too blinding by hate to even incorporate basic facts into their world view.
 
Considering that the Facebook coalition are all heavily in the tank for the DNC and have been actively censoring negative press about Democrats, it's pretty damn obvious where this is going.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
There is no doubt that MSNBC (and to a lesser extent CNN) have editorial slants. Every publication/channel does, because the media are made up of people and people have biases. It is impossible for a person to be unbiased regarding almost anything.

You are right, MSNBC is very much like Fox News, and there is a reason for that. They saw the Fox news model and how it worked, and tried to copy it, but for the left instead of the right. IMHO, they belong in the same category of frequently playing fast and loose with the facts in order to score political points.

The whole "Liberal media" thing - however - is as fake now as it was when it originally sprung onto the debate scene back in the 80's. It was fabricated in order to make conservatives feel like victims and drive them out to vote.

Most media outlets, while they have a slight editorial slant (many leftward, but some rightward too like the Wall Street Journal, and modern Washington Post) still keep to the facts though. They may interpret said facts differently based on their editorial slant, but the facts are still the facts. Sometimes there have been isolated cases of mistakes being made, but in general for most publications, they have been quickly retracted and fixed.

Fox news is in a class all of its own for its willingness to just completely make up whatever suits them at the moment to try to drive a political point, without any regard for what is factual at all. A couple of examples include Obamacare has Death Panels, Obama is a Kenyan born Muslim.

It's one thing to have a editorial slant while reporting on the facts. It is human. We all have "editorial" slants. it's another to completely make up stories repeatedly on the same side of every issue to try to sway important political issues. Fox News has been in a class of their own here. MSNBC have tried to mimic their style, but they just haven't been able to as brazenly pull off outright intentional lies as Fox has.
Click to expand...

You must have missed the latest Gucifer link.

In it, the DNC have discussions with all the major Outlets, Fox News included, about hit pieces on Trump and what they're going to say.

Fox News is just as much a part of all of it as well as CNN and all major media. It's all the same. And it's all corrupt propaganda.

GLZNwV.jpg
 
Zion Halcyon said:
You must have missed the latest Gucifer link.

In it, the DNC have discussions with all the major Outlets, Fox News included, about hit pieces on Trump and what they're going to say.

Fox News is just as much a part of all of it as well as CNN and all major media. It's all the same. And it's all corrupt propaganda.

GLZNwV.jpg
Click to expand...


Without more to back that up, I'm going to call fake or out of context. I just googled the hell out of it, including detailed quoates regarding "hits" and "DNC" "Email leak" and nothing....


Nothing, except some crazy people on twitter retweeting it back and forth among each other as if it were fact though...
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
Without more to back that up, I'm going to call fake or out of context. I just googled the hell out of it, including detailed quoates regarding "hits" and "DNC" "Email leak" and nothing....


Nothing, except some crazy people on twitter retweeting it back and forth among each other as if it were fact though...
Click to expand...

Yep, here it is. Out of context as I suspected.

It's in an email thread where it is pretty clear they are discussing bookings for their people on major news shows, where a hit, is the opposite of a miss. IN other words they got their person on air to be interviewed, or they didn't.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
Yep, here it is. Out of context as I suspected.

It's in an email thread where it is pretty clear they are discussing bookings for their people on major news shows, where a hit, is the opposite of a miss. IN other words they got their person on air to be interviewed, or they didn't.
Click to expand...

Not out of context at all. Seriously, a HIT is a HIT PIECE. I assume you know what a HIT PIECE is? *shakes head*

Cognitive dissonance is an amazing thing to behold...
 
Zion Halcyon said:
Not out of context at all. Seriously, a HIT is a HIT PIECE. I assume you know what a HIT PIECE is? *shakes head*

Cognitive dissonance is an amazing thing to behold...
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong. I don't out it beneath the DNC at all. After all the shit they did to the Bernie campaign it is pretty clear what a corrupt organization they are.

I just highly doubt this is the evidence you think it is of the press being putty in their hands.
 
Zion Halcyon said:
Not out of context at all. Seriously, a HIT is a HIT PIECE. I assume you know what a HIT PIECE is? *shakes head*

Cognitive dissonance is an amazing thing to behold...
Click to expand...
Yeah it really is. I don't think you get the irony, though.
 
Powerage said:
And thusly, you lost all credibility in this thread. What kind of dumbass believes this sort of bullshit? Rush Limbaugh's file

Top quote is him saying the presence of Gorillas calls evolution into question. What a fucking idiot.
Click to expand...

I was watching a nature show last night on Netflix.

They said that the flowers and the birds co-evolved at the same time so that specific flowers fit specific species of birds bills perfectly.

Now that right there is what I call complete and total idiocy.

Not only is it absolutely and completely impossible for "evolution" as defined by the "scientific community" to ever happen, multiple plants and animals "evolving" at the same time in order to perfectly serve each other is even more ludicrous.

If you actually do research on "evolution", you will find that it is a complete farce.

Now real natural selection as well as variety and specific traits taking over in order for survival is possible.

But one species evolving from another is NOT and NEVER will be possible and NEVER was possible.
 
cyclone3d said:
I was watching a nature show last night on Netflix.

They said that the flowers and the birds co-evolved at the same time so that specific flowers fit specific species of birds bills perfectly.

Now that right there is what I call complete and total idiocy.

Not only is it absolutely and completely impossible for "evolution" as defined by the "scientific community" to ever happen, multiple plants and animals "evolving" at the same time in order to perfectly serve each other is even more ludicrous.

If you actually do research on "evolution", you will find that it is a complete farce.

Now real natural selection as well as variety and specific traits taking over in order for survival is possible.

But one species evolving from another is NOT and NEVER will be possible and NEVER was possible.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I can tell you've really put a lot of thought into this. What's your Ph.D. in? Evolutionary Biology? Zoology? Ecology? Oh wait, you don't fucking have one.

Free free to tell me about your personal relationship with an omniscient supreme deity, though. There's a ton of evidence for that.

Also, I love how you claim one species evolving from another is impossible when you clearly have no fucking clue about biology. Do you even know how individual species are defined? How are you at all qualified to make this statement?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top