Slashdot Mirror
Former Facebook Workers: We Routinely Suppressed Conservative News (gizmodo.com)
Michael Nunez, reporting for Gizmodo: Facebook workers routinely suppressed news stories of interest to conservative readers from the social network's influential "trending" news section, according to a former journalist who worked on the project. This individual says that workers prevented stories about the right-wing CPAC gathering, Mitt Romney, Rand Paul, and other conservative topics from appearing in the highly-influential section, even though they were organically trending among the site's users. In other words, Facebook's news section operates like a traditional newsroom, reflecting the biases of its workers and the institutional imperatives of the corporation. Imposing human editorial values onto the lists of topics an algorithm spits out is by no means a bad thing -- but it is in stark contrast to the company's claims that the trending module simply lists "topics that have recently become popular on Facebook." The revelation comes amid a report on the same publication which claimed that a small group of journalists controlled and decided what should trend on Facebook. Also recently, a leaked screenshot revealed Facebook employees asking whether they should do something to prevent Donald Trump from becoming the president.
When Zuckerberg is running the show and agrees with your lefty political positions, all of the sudden Corporations have rights and should be allowed to run the elections as long as they support the "correct" positions.
You saying this doesn't make it true. I don't know of anybody suggesting that corporations should have "rights" or should "run the elections" other than the super wealthy and the non-wealthy dullards who support them.
I don't respond to AC's.
p>Just this week he has gone from repudiating the debt to inflating it away.
Did you conclude that yourself from listening to him, and the context of his words? It sounds more like you are repeating an interpretation of his words from some very recent news articles. What you'll find out about Trump is that he's not one who thinks there is only one way to solve a problem or move forward. That bugs far right conservatives, and it gives fodder to liberals.
Ah yes the "liberal media" LOL. The largest single news source in the US is Fox News, but sure, let's go with that obscure idea that there's some left-wing media. MSNBC is the only one that's left wing, CNN and the rest are fairly neutral or right leaning by multiple sources, but you keep on believing your little weird world view. Add to that conservatives control all talk radio, large swaths of the internet and Twitter and despite what this article implies without a shred of actual evidence, you know, proof, you continue to think you're able to discern truth any better than a naive high schooler. This article is a right wing circle jerk and nothing more.
This is just journalism majors being journalism majors. It's why we can't get decent coverage of science stories.
There was, for a while. It was a network called Air America and it had hosts like Jerry Springer. It failed spectacularly.
>>You're just old and confused by people not wanting to give a podium to nakedly racist sexist assholes.
Ageism. Not quite as trendy as "racism" and "sexism," as it's inherently a disease of the fashionably young. But you're an ageist.
>>we don't need to give them a space to talk
Yeah, son, actually you kinda do. And that space is called "everywhere in the U.S." You're just young, and confusing the rights you think you *should* have with the rights outlined in the Constitution that you actually, legally, *do* have.
Bullcrap. This has been the primary point of contention between Bernie Sanders and the democratic leadership. The current democratic front runner for president is on record as saying it is impossible and a bad idea and will never ever happen. Thats the democratic standard these days, its not very liberal.
Now if the question was "do you hear progressives calling for full public healtcare" then sure, that happens all the time, but the democratic party no longer strongly represents progressive values. It only supports things that are "liberal" when they can draw a line of outrage between them and the republicans.
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
Is there a liberal equivalent of talk radio?
Commercially, no. All large scale commercial attempts have failed spectacularly. Air America is the most outstanding attempt that comes to mind. The only national network is NPR. While not specifically liberal, the network tends toward liberal views. Many of NPR's large supporters have a liberal bend so they have a large influence on their programming.
There several independent liberal radio station but they tend be in larger, more affluent cities.
You say things that offend me and I can deal with it. Can you?
Actually, that you believe there is a SJW movement to be deplored speaks to the effectiveness of the extremists on the right to concoct a narrative.
I'm sure there are some nutjobs, but c'mon, there's no movement.
It's not bullcrap. Every single socia...err...Democrat I know wants single payer. They all admit that the ACA which they all fullheartedly supported is now a failure, and we should impose single payer instead. And don't act like every Dem in congress wouldn't vote for it if it came up.
Norway is single payer and the system and it usually has long waiting times. Also, many things are not covered. For example, if you get an ACL injury playing soccer, the system will only cover emergency treatment. It will not cover the reconstruction surgery because it is not life threatening. Of course, you will have chronic pain and won't be able to run anymore. You have the option pay for the surgery at a very high price (like everything else in Norway).
Sweden is a combination of government payed and private insurance companies. The public system also has long waiting times. For example, if you want to see a specialist doctor you have to wait around four months. With private insurance the wait for this is reduced to days, although not for more complex procedures.
The Netherlands is fully private. All hospitals are private and it's not single payer. It is mandatory for people to buy private health insurance. Insurance companies cannot deny people from buying the most basic package, but the government compensates insurance companies when they sell to high-risk people.
Switzerland is similar to The Netherlands.
So no. Single payer is not the norm in Europe and where it is it's not always as good as you might think.
My heart is pure, but make no mistake, it's pure evil