Slashdot Mirror


30% of Americans Get News From Facebook According To Pew Research Poll

An anonymous reader writes "According to a recent Pew Research poll a third of Americans get their news while they 'like' things. 'All in all, then, it may be the very incidental nature of the site that ultimately exposes more people to news there,' Pew said. 'Indeed, the more time one spends on the site, the more likely they are to get news there.'"

39 of 194 comments (clear)

  1. Applies to all events? by RunFatBoy.net · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Facebook makes me personally more engaged and thoughtful of all events, both news and personal.

    It's amazing how I can see someone that I connected with on Facebook in real life and have a vague notion of what they are up to. It makes me feel connected. The same goes for news; my friends all read the new several times a day and therefore gives me a hand on the pulse of current events, even though that's not my intent.

    1. Re:Applies to all events? by Garridan · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I get my news from Slashdot. My wife tells me I have a very republican-leaning family -- if I was on facebook, I'd probably be exposed to a larger breadth of opinion. Confirmation bias? I try to look elsewhere for news... but ultimately, I keep coming back to the places that present the stories that I care about.

    2. Re:Applies to all events? by houstonbofh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The problem is the echo chaimber it creates. If you only get news your friends share, where do you get alternative viewpoints?

    3. Re:Applies to all events? by aaronb1138 · · Score: 2

      News in general should be about the condition and potential effects of a given event on society. You're blathering on about emotions, feelings, and the individual; the worship of selfishness. It is still a form of selfishness to identify with another selfish soul devoid of facts and full context -- it is the confirmation to one's own selfishness to indulge and support selfishness in others.

      Academia often states that Wikipedia for example is a poor source, not because by definition it is a tertiary / secondary source, but because the signal to noise ratio is poor and they fear students lack the ability to differentiate (the SNR of Wikipedia is generally good overall). The SNR for news on Facebook is easily orders of magnitude worse. Even Jersey Shore and similar reality TV trash are more useful to society. Too much of the news which propagates on Facebook is tabloid confessionals and one-sided falsehoods, much of it fiction made up from vague opinionated interpretations of actual events. Those who engage in it's spread should be burned as heretics to the betterment of society, knowledge, and wisdom. It's sickening and disgusting.

      The society of, "how I feel is paramount" is harmful to everyone. I am a person of religious conviction, but I would condemn the proselytizer as a sinner just as an emotional human I condemn the person for whom the societal discussion is steered by emotion, opinion, and falsehood instead of core truth.

    4. Re:Applies to all events? by aaronb1138 · · Score: 2

      TL:DR version: You're talking about gossip, not news.

    5. Re:Applies to all events? by rockout · · Score: 2

      MSNBC and Fox get what, a few million viewers, max, per day? A tiny fraction of the population of the US.

      Your false dichotomy is a direct result of your desire to feel like you know something that everyone else doesn't, or at least, most other people, all of whom you regard as being not as smart as yourself. It's a ridiculous point of view bred by your narcissism.

      Lemme guess, you can also tell us about the real story behind 9/11, that only you and a few other really smart people know about. "Really smart" in this case meaning you read websites that aren't "on anyone else's radar."

      --
      I've learned that they're worthless, so I don't read AC comments anymore.
    6. Re:Applies to all events? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      I've become much more libertarian since I came to slashdot. Nothing like having people tell you you're an idiot simply because you disagree with them on policy.

      You're an idiot for changing views just because someone disagrees with you.

    7. Re:Applies to all events? by Mitchell314 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Odd, I've had the complete opposite experience. I'm politically libertarian, but I loathe to ever admit it in public due to the connotation of them being stuck-up pricks that love to idealize the world in 'flawless' little politico-economic frameworks. And in my experiences, that stereotype is not entirely unfounded. When your first reaction is to pick a stance on something based solely on 'minimizing government', as opposed to starting from first principles or from inductive reasoning drawing on history, you've got a problem. You've got an ivory-toweritis problem. I'm libertarian because on average my own path of reasoning tends to draw me to free market solutions and socially-liberal fiscally conservative stances (which I'm not going to be arrogant enough to claim "how the world really is", that's elitist talk), but I never felt the same with my political 'peers'.

      --
      I read TFA and all I got was this lousy cookie
    8. Re:Applies to all events? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 2

      I'm not a conspiracy advocate. I think 19 guys from mostly Saudi Arabia flew airplanes into buildings. What I find amazing are the people who think that GWB orchestrated it, while simultaneously believing he is the stupidest president ever; one the one hand he is pure evil genius and on the other hand a monkey is smarter than he is. Hilarious!

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    9. Re:Applies to all events? by Runaway1956 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      More accurately, an idiot is incapable of changing his views. Anyone with a working brain evaluates and considers news and opinions. Well presented views, news, and opinions SHOULD enable a person to change his own views. GP deserves a nod of respect, whether you agree with his opinions or not.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    10. Re:Applies to all events? by Runaway1956 · · Score: 4, Funny

      "Elite Anonymous Coward". Wow - what a concept.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    11. Re:Applies to all events? by NixieBunny · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Today's Facebook echo chamber was echoing a lot of Lou Reed songs. That was all the news that mattered today.

      --
      The determined Real Programmer can write Fortran programs in any language.
    12. Re:Applies to all events? by girlintraining · · Score: 2

      The problem is the echo chaimber it creates. If you only get news your friends share, where do you get alternative viewpoints?

      This begs the question of why someone would want to get alternative viewpoints. Most people don't want to be regularly exposed to ideas, beliefs, culture, etc., that conflicts with their own. It creates anxiety, anger, and/or dissociation. The begged question, by the way, is also a rhetorical question. But it doesn't change human nature, and we are talking about Facebook here.

      The "social network" is not simply a conduit for human virtues -- it is equally a conduit for human failures. And let's be honest with ourselves -- critical thinking is hard work. Even (perhaps especially) amongst the highly literate and/or intelligent, who are practiced at overcoming their own biases to keep an open mind, must still be deliberate and cautious.

      On that note, for those who so desire to find alternative viewpoints social networks provide plenty of opportunity. Many of my friends and I debate on Facebook, each playing devil's advocate to the other in a semi-public venue. I have also found, painfully, that if one wishes to test how tolerant their friends truly are... post something unpopular and defend it. The results are both illuminating, and occasionally warrant making popcorn to witness the explosively violent ways in which people react to opposing views.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    13. Re:Applies to all events? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      This begs the question

      No, it doesn't. It raises the question. "Begging the question" is something else entirely.

    14. Re:Applies to all events? by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

      I love the arguments I get in on here where I'll re-state what a candidate for the Libertarian Party said, as if it represents the current US libertarian movement, and I'm corrected that LP is not libertarian, or something like that. Or I'll state that I'm libertarian, but I don't vote libertarian because I don't agree with the LP, and people tell me if I don't agree with the LP, then I can't be a libertarian.

      The funny thing is the large number of responses to the same comment/person that are contradictory. The talk about "groupthink" is funny when the group is neither aligned, nor "thinking".

    15. Re:Applies to all events? by Barsteward · · Score: 2

      thats like watching Fox news. i wouldn't trust anything on Facebook, Twitter etc at all for accurate impartial news

      --
      "The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
    16. Re:Applies to all events? by DragonTHC · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's amazing how I can see someone that I connected with on Facebook in real life and have a vague notion of what they are up to. It makes me feel connected.

      For the last time, she dumped you in high school. You're no longer "connected".

      --
      They're using their grammar skills there.
    17. Re:Applies to all events? by aaaaaaargh! · · Score: 2

      What I don't understand about modern day US libertarians is that the classical economic theory they seem to mostly endorse contradicts their own central principles, and even in relatively obvious ways. For instance, the Principle of Diminishing Marginal Utility in combination with sum-utilitarianism implies that monetary transfers from the rich to the poor increase overall utility, game theory can be used to show that free markets lead to cartels, there are Pareto efficient states in which one person owns almost everything and the rest are slave workers, etc., none of which seems to be desirable to anyone. There are countless examples of this kind.

      Notice that I'm not saying that classical economic theory is right, I'm just pointing out how baffling the main doctrines of libertarianism can appear to an outsider. But I'm sure I got it all wrong in the eyes of some libertarian economists... ;-)

    18. Re:Applies to all events? by Barsteward · · Score: 2

      you never argue with an idiot. they'll bring you down to their level and they'll win because they have had more practice...

      --
      "The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
    19. Re:Applies to all events? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Exactly! That's why I get all my news on Slashdot.

    20. Re:Applies to all events? by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 2

      Thanks for proving why I changed my views. People like you, who hide behind the cloak of A/C comments. I didn't say I changed my views because people call me names. I said it doesn't help your cause. Which you seem to have completely missed. And if that is the best retort the the "elite" has to offer, it isn't much of one. Thanks for proving my case for me.

      Actually, given your sentence structure, you did say you changed your views because of people on slashdot calling you an idiot for your previous views. Maybe that wasn't your intention, but that is actually what you communicated. Now, giving you the benefit of the doubt that English is not your primary language, what were you trying to say?

    21. Re:Applies to all events? by Dishevel · · Score: 4, Funny
      Libertarians are are not socially liberal. They are not fiscally conservative. Libertarians believe in actual rights of human beings. More than what are now being called rights. The things that the liberals are calling rights involve mostly taking things from other people. Libertarians are mostly just correct. Conservatives and Liberals get a few things right by accident.

      Short story is that Liberals understand a few things that are socially Libertarian, Conservatives understand a few things that are fiscally Libertarian. Libertarians get most things right except on the rare occasion they go bat shit crazy.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    22. Re:Applies to all events? by Bite+The+Pillow · · Score: 2

      Anyone with a working brain actively resists changing their mind. People shown to be wrong are more likely to remain dedicated to the wrong facts.
      It takes someone with an open mind, or little emotional investment, to have their opinion changed by argument or facts. Or, if you grow to detest the source, like family or an ex.
      Changing political leanings is very hard, but if it all you read it can become first familiar, then recognizable, then obvious.
      You described what we expect of brains, not how they are used.

  2. the other 40% by deodiaus2 · · Score: 5, Funny

    the other 40% get it from Fox News. The rest don't care.

    1. Re:the other 40% by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      More accurately in this case 47% of Facebook users who are willing to do surveys on Facebook get their 'internet' news from Facebook shared likes

      No. This survey was not conducted by Facebook, or on Facebook. It was conducted by the Pew Research Center, a reputable polling organization. Protip: If you don't have time before posting to read the article, or the summary, you should still at least read the headline.

  3. Explains a lot by justcauseisjustthat · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So many people, so misinformed.

  4. The news you want by Arancaytar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The great part about getting information from a social network is that you can precisely fine-tune what information you allow to seep into your personal bubble.

    1. Re:The news you want by ScottCooperDotNet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The great part about getting information from a social network is that you can precisely fine-tune what information you allow to seep into your personal bubble.

      The downside is the self-selection bias of online news makes for an echo chamber of one's existing beliefs, ensuring no facts that run counter to one's existing thoughts are presented. We're all better informed of the opinions we agree with, but as ignorant as ever of those holding opposing views.

  5. summary says 'ever' by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 5, Informative

    As in ""Overall, about half of adult Facebook users, or 47 percent, 'ever' get news there," Pew said in its report. "That amounts to 30 percent of the population."

    So if you see a news story on Facebook, once in a while, i.e. often enough to remember that you did it, ever, you're in the 30%. It's a deceptive summary.

    The referenced article goes on to say, "Just 4 percent said Facebook is the most important way they get news"

    Carry on with your silliness.

    1. Re:summary says 'ever' by Kohath · · Score: 2

      Misinformation? In a news post? No way!

  6. US news media are a joke by Kohath · · Score: 4, Informative

    Why not get your news from Facebook? Almost every source of news in the US spins and/or censors coverage for someone's political gain. If you're going to hear lies about current events, you might as well hear them from your friends.

    1. Re:US news media are a joke by utkonos · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But news from facebook is not first person. It's just your friends posting links to those same news sources that you're complaining about.

    2. Re:US news media are a joke by msobkow · · Score: 2

      I read news feeds from around the world and post comments to crackbook about them with links to the articles.

      The US news is the *last* thing I read, because it is the *least* informative and the *most biased.*

      For example: Not one word about the anti-NSA protests in US media. Still. Yet there were articles about the protests from Al Jazeera, Russia Times, and France 24.

      I pity Americans. You're led around like sheep and you're too naval-gazing to realize how misinformed you are.

      --
      I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    3. Re:US news media are a joke by ArbitraryName · · Score: 5, Informative

      For example: Not one word about the anti-NSA protests in US media. Still.

      Your news gathering skills are....poor to say the least.

      USA Today: Anti-NSA rally attracts thousands to march in Washington http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/10/26/nsa-dc-rally/3241417/

      Huffington Post: NSA 'Stop Watching Us' Protest Draws Thousands In Washington http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/26/nsa-stop-watching-us_n_4166640.html

      US News and Word Report: Edward Snowden Endorses D.C. Protest Against NSA in Rare Public Statement http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/10/24/edward-snowden-endorses-dc-protest-against-nsa-in-rare-public-statement

      Christian Science Monitor: NSA Washington: March against surveillance and a call from Edward Snowden http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2013/1026/NSA-Washington-March-against-surveillance-and-a-call-from-Edward-Snowden-photos

      CNN: Anti-NSA rally targets Washington http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/10/26/anti-nsa-rally-targets-washington/

      Fox News: Hundreds rally in DC to protest NSA http://video.foxnews.com/v/2772548586001/hundreds-rally-in-dc-to-protest-nsa/

      NBC News: Hundreds march at anti-NSA rally in DC http://www.nbcnews.com/video/nightly-news/53383405

      CBS News: Protesters March For Investigation Into Mass NSA Spying http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2013/10/26/protesters-march-for-investigation-into-mass-nsa-spying/

      ABC News: NSA Spying Threatens to Hamper US Foreign Policy http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/nsa-spying-threatens-hamper-us-foreign-policy-20689770

      Washington Post: Techies concerned over NSA surveillance will march in D.C., proclaiming ‘Stop Watching Us’ http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/techies-concerned-over-nsa-surveillance-will-march-in-dc-proclaiming-stop-watching-us/2013/10/25/5bedb546-3da7-11e3-b7ba-503fb5822c3e_story.html

      This is where I get tired of pasting, but I assure you the list goes on and on.

  7. Fast News Facebook Friends by parallel_prankster · · Score: 2

    I think everyone has a friend on FB who posts news items really fast. As soon as they happen. It is almost like some people feel compelled to be the first to ancounce news on Facebook. I think those few people may be responsible for most others getting their news on FB as well.

  8. It's not all that different from Slashdot ... by MacTO · · Score: 4, Insightful

    My (admittedly limited) experience on Facebook suggest that people who are engaged with current events will link to stories, and others will comment on them or like them. That doesn't seem to be all that different from what happens on Slashdot or forums. The difference is in the depth of that layman commentary and how well you know the people involved in the discussion.

    So it's not that Facebook is the source of the news. I would be horrified if that was the case. Facebook is simply being used to connect people to the news, and those links may be to more reputable sources. There is reason to be concerned about the bias that a person finds within their own social circles, but you get a lot of bias from sites like Slashdot and forums anyhow.

  9. Not from Facebook by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 2

    The pollsters missed it by the phrasing of their question. People aren't getting their news from Facebook. They're getting news from their friends and people they're following, who happen to be posting links to that news to Facebook. The difference is subtle but important. If someone goes "Oh, all we need to do is get our stories to appear on Facebook.", they're going to have their whole push fall on it's face because nobody's reading their articles. They'd need to get their articles in front of the people who lots of other people follow first, and make those articles interesting enough that those people post links to them for their followers to see. That's more complicated than just getting your story carried by a half-dozen major outlets.

    1. Re:Not from Facebook by roc97007 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That the news you see on your facebook feed has to have been deemed important by one of your friends (or one of their friends) is a very good point. Where this breaks down is that your friends (or at least, *my* friends) will believe anything. Including that microwaved water will kill plants and that keying in your PIN backwards will call the police. Taken holistically, it creates a very bizarre picture of the world.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  10. Pew Research... by BlogTheHaggis · · Score: 2

    Bwahahahahahaha...