Slashdot Mirror
Senate GOP Launches Inquiry Into Facebook's News Curation (gizmodo.com)
Michael Nunez, reporting for Gizmodo: The US Senate Commerce Committee -- which has jurisdiction over media issues, consumer protection issues, and internet communication -- has sent a letter to Mark Zuckerberg requesting answers to questions it has on its trending topics section. The letter comes after Gizmodo on Monday reported on allegations by one former news curator, who worked for Facebook as a contractor, that the curation team routinely suppressed or blacklisted topics of interest to conservatives. That report also included allegations from several former curators that they used an "injection tool" to add or bump stories onto the trending module. The letter asks that Facebook "arrange for your staff including employees responsible for trending topics to brief committee staff on this issue." The letter was signed by Chairman for the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, Senator John Thune (R) from South Dakota.
Exactly. It's political theater. The classic case of which was the "Parent's Music Resource Council", where Tipper Gore got then-Senator Al Gore to hold a hearing on lyrics in top-40 songs. Testifying were Frank Zappa, John Denver, and Dee Snider. Fairly epic hearing, as I recall, and I also seem to recall a movie was made of it. . .
The facebook contractors were told to block conservative stories (whatever that means these days) and these GOP Senators are making a big deal out of it - to get votes and continue the myth that the media has a Liberal (whatever that means these days) bias.
And of course there is going to be a big chunk of their constituency that will fall for this complete and utter waste of Senate time.
Idiocracy is a documentary you know.
Look out, /. editors; you're next.
Zuckerberg has stated manyy times that he wants Facebook to be your only news source.
Because it's Congress and they can investigate anything for the sheer hell of it.
Get the popcorn; it's political theater folks!
Table-ized A.I.
Because Republicans control congress and need to make it appear as though they do something because they, congress, haven't been governing for the last 8-10 years.
They cannot pass a law about it but they can see if the allegations are correct. This is a legitimate action by congress,
? The allegation is corruption on the part of a business. Are you saying that Congress may not investigate business to ascertain if corruption is part and parcel of their business plan? (Even if they cannot pass a law to rectify the situation?)
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
Speaking of BS, Hillary has also been on Fox multiple times, and was most recently interviewed by Wallace over Benghazi. So has Pelosi. Obama was interviewed by O'Reilly twice, maybe even a third time. He's been interviewed by other Fox hosts as well, he did one with Chris Wallace just this past month. These interviews are all online and heavily promoted by Fox
So you should probably not make stuff up.
I find that all of them don't report what the really important things. Slashdot at least will often have something important while most of the news is just a pitch for some product. I don't find it slanted to the left at all, MSNBC doesn't have the power that Fox News has. I find the supposed left wing MSNBC a little to the right, but we all have different opinions. We don't read much in the news of South and Central America and what our government has done to those countries. We don't get reporting on why Iran hates us so much because of Eisenhower's interference in a duly elected government back in the 1950s. We hear about Syrian refugees not being welcome but who in the hell caused them to be refugee? What about Iraq? It was our foreign policies that contributed to these problems.
What I do know is that if there is a "credible" allegation of corruption (whatever that means) that Congress can and should investigate it.
Maybe they can start with themselves.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
In denial much? Right bloody here:
This undeniably implies objectivity. Depending on how (un)charitable you wish to be, it also explicitly promises it...
No it most certainly does not. You purposely ignored this particular line:
The topics you see are based on a number of factors including engagement, timeliness, Pages you've liked and your location.
It DOES not say anything like "objectivity." The "number of factors" gives them all the leeway to put whatever the fuck they want in there.
Nope, no victims. Just more whining.