Slashdot Mirror
Internal Docs Show Human Intervention at Almost Every Stage Of Facebook's News Operation (theguardian.com)
More evidence has surfaced to support Gawker's two recent reports that claimed editors manipulate the trending news and a few other aspects on Facebook. The Guardian, citing leaked documents it obtained, reports that the topics one sees on Facebook are determined on a number of factors including "engagement, timeliness, Pages you've liked and your location." From the report: But the documents show that the company relies heavily on the intervention of a small editorial team to determine what makes its "trending module" headlines -- the list of news topics that shows up on the side of the browser window on Facebook's desktop version. The company backed away from a pure-algorithm approach in 2014 after criticism that it had not included enough coverage of unrest in Ferguson, Missouri, in users' feeds. The guidelines show human intervention -- and therefore editorial decisions -- at almost every stage of Facebook's trending news operation, a team that at one time was as few as 12 people.Sam Biddle of Gawker, wrote: Never trust what a company tells you, on/off record -- FB straight up lied to Recode last year. He adds: unless they're under oath a company like Facebook has every incentive to lie about how it operates. It's not illegal to lie to a reporter!"
Update: 05/12 20:49 GMT by M : Facebook has published a blog post in which it explains how Trending Topics on its platform works. The company insists that there is no discrimination against sources of any political origin.
Update: 05/12 20:49 GMT by M : Facebook has published a blog post in which it explains how Trending Topics on its platform works. The company insists that there is no discrimination against sources of any political origin.
Huh?
Whose internal docs, and whose news operation? The Slashdot headline lacks any clue that the subject is Facebook.
LOL, OMG, no, no wait, OMFG, ROFLMAO.
What kind of crappy headline is this? Who is it talking about.....oh, Facebook.
I guessed who's operation because I follow the news, but come on...
The Moore-Murphy Law: The number of things that will go wrong will double every 2 years.
They're not exactly the highest professional or unbiased quasi news entity either.
All algorithms are written by humans and all humans are biased. All this reveals is that the Facebook trending algorithm was sufficiently crap that they had to use more humans than would otherwise be required to implement the employer's view.
What I don't really get about America is why there's such a war between "liberal" (centre-right) and "conservative" (right) when on pretty much every issue they agree. To find that sort of bickering in Europe you have to bring popcorn to a demo featuring both neo-nazis and antifa groups - and even then everyone goes home for tea.
"it" is never referred to properly so it's more like a headline about some news operation called "human intervention".
Facebook can place on their website whatever the hell they like. They are not a monopoly subject to government oversight. Facebook will not be testifying before a committee on this manner.
gawker is certainly the apex of journalistic integrity!!
Slashdot could use a little human intervention in its news outfit, I believe.
Napoleon was the best general in the world because he bought the Newspapers. Propaganda is a weapon of war and a way to shape society and opinion.
Manipulating trending topics is essentially a violation of the neutrality that people expect from their data providers. (And that we require from common carriers. Facebook is basically a common carrier at this point--how many hundreds of millions of messages, articles, advertisements, events, etc... go through Facebook?)
Real lawyers write in C++
Sam Biddle of Gawker, wrote: Never trust what a company tells you
Talk about the pot calling the kettle a spade.
If you think FB is unfairly biased, just buy myspace and turn it into Fox News.
Never mind their "Trending Topics" garbage, which I completely ignore anyway; what the heck his driving their "People you might know" friend suggestions?
I don't know any of those people and I don't want to know them, so fuck off facebook.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
FB is publicly traded, so depending on what is said and why, it might be illegal.
.
Facebook is an entertainment company, not a news company. Facebook's business goal is to ~encourage~ its users to visit the site as often as possible and stay as long as possible.
It is completely and wholly Facebook's prerogative how Facebook accomplishes its business goals, with legal parameters, of course.
So long as Facebook is not breaking the law, I say that the complainers should take their whining somewhere else.
And to those idiots in Congress who are wasting public money on this, why in the world are you messing with facebook when the good people of Flint, MI still cannot drink the water?
Is this really a shock? Facebook is not really a news organization. At best, the "Trending" section is a news aggregator, and will all such aggregations, decisions are made to what gets prominence, and what doesn't.
Hell, ask any newspaper editor. Most of them will have a story or three of wishing they had more than one front page per edition because of multiple big events in the same day, and likewise, they'll have stories where technically speaking nothing big happened, but they still had to have something on the front page.
Is it a shock that humans are involved in the FB decision making process? No, not really.
Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
I don't know what people are complaining about. My feed is packed to the gills with posts decrying Hillary for everything from Benghazi to her alliance with the lizard people (And those arguing that she in fact is the queen of the lizard people).
If facebook is supposed to be suppressing this stuff they're doing a terrible job.
Are you attempting to imply that they lied about Facebook? Are you attempting to claim that Facebook lying to customers has no impact? Are you trying to claim that because one person did something wrong they can never point out that another did something wrong? Are you trying to claim that Facebook is innocent? What is the point, perhaps simply a cheap attempt at karma whoring?
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Because Zionists.
Uhmm . . . They are call EDITORS for a reason. Does the New York Times run every possible news story? Who decides what news story ends up on the front page? Yeah I think they are called EDITORS. People that decide "manipulate" the importance and placement of news stories are called News EDITORS.
Who the hell decided to put this story on Slashdot? Oh yeah it was an EDITOR, imagine that . . .
Facebook promised it's customers that it was providing an unbiased aggregation service based on customers posting stories. Since they actually silenced stories they did not want to trend, and inserted those they did, while claiming "we are just an unbiased aggregate", they broke the law.
Propaganda is a huge issue which Congress _should_ be trying to address. Some of these actions are treasonous (word chosen intentionally, investigate it's use).
You not caring that people are being brainwashed and that people are attempting to undermine the laws of the land is a different issue all together. A Bill Engval quote comes to mind..
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Out of all of the people that I interact with on a reasonable regular basis in real life, I don't know a single one to be a Sanders supporter (note: we all have jobs!) However, if you looked at my Facebook news feed, you'd think everyone I knew was a BS supporter.
Even after I turned off notifications about BS i still get them. I have yet to see a single thing about Donald Trump that wasn't negative either.
Obviously something is going on here. They are a private company and have the right to do that, but they shouldn't be lying about it.
...as long as Fox uses the word "News".
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
Sounds like Facebook.com is best accessed from Brainwash.com
I don't trust any single source for news. Why would anyone think that they were getting unfiltered news from a website like Facebook?
I know folks are going to have to report to a Congressional Committee over this, but why is this a story? NBC leans heavily liberal, Fox leans heavily conservative, CNN does something which only people in airports actually see.
Facebook may get sued by those who pay for advertisements on their website, which may be fair, based on the wording of contracts.
Is it just because Gawker is screaming about this at the moment, that this is news? There is no unbiased news anymore, why does this shock or confuse anyone?
a public company has an obligation to its shareholders to make as much money as possible.
That is completely wrong, and it's sad that so many people like yourself think that is at all what the shareholder/company relationship is about.
The company only has a duty to run the company well, which means whatever the company wants it to mean. You could have a company whose primary goal is, for example, to use only recycled material to build birdhouses. They would make more money by using cheaper material, but that is against the company goal...
The shareholder, meanwhile, may invest for a thousand different reasons. Sure they would like to make money but often they are investing in a company whose mission they agree with, even if possibly they could make more money investing elsewhere.
Regardless, again the company does NOT HAVE A DUTY to make "as much money as possible". They can do whatever they like, and larger issues they put up for a vote for shareholders to help decide - but that means if the motivations of the shareholders align with those running the company, the choices could very well be ones that do not "make the most money". Since most public companies have the majority of stock held by a few key people, in fact MOST choices companies make are not "to make the most money", they are about strategic positioning to help the company grow or better do what the company was built to do.
Until you understand this core fact, you will never understand the actions of companies nor indeed make much money in the market.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
This is one of those hilarious pseudo-scandals where the faux-aggrieved have to pretend to be total idiots to make their case.
What halfway intelligent person is surprised by any of this?
The outrage here is humans taking the jobs of algorithms?
Hold on a second, this whole controversy suggests that people actually pay attention to "Trending" on Facebook. Whenever I see this mentioned I have to remind myself that this "feature" even exists. Then I remember it is that section on Facebook that has all of those annoying "headlines" that never have anything I am even vaguely interested in.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Anyone who uses Facebook as their primary news source deserves all they get.
The Republicans killed the fairness doctrine and 30 years later they only start thinking about the possible consequences. It's pretty typical of them. Just like they never for a second imagined that the executive power overreach of the Bush administration could one day be used by a democratic president, they never contemplated the possibility that their corporatist agenda could someday turn against them.
Everything they have pushed since the 70's had led to this. Corporations are now people. They wanted it that way. Facebook is therefore guaranteed freedom of expression. If Facebook wants to spew liberal propaganda, it is free to do so.
Idiots never learn.
Algorithms are still far from ready to decide what could be promoted and what not. Otherwise you would have all kinds of weird stuff trending. Especially right wing nut pages (the ones that get "censored") float all kinds of bullshit and have it shared all over Facebook, which means it is trending.
Imagine all the really random "Obama-is-secret-suicide-bomber" stories that you keep getting from your nutty relatives being promoted as "trending" on the official Facebook. There is a reason why Glenn Beck and Fox News exist. Because they make a shitton of money. People eat that crap up.
That is why you need filters. Lots of them. I also explained why this whole thing is a non-story anyways here:
https://slashdot.org/comments....
...that a company has employees in charge of what they publish on their site, whether there's user-driven content or not?
Well, they don't seem to have any problem declaring your phone "an instrument of interstate commerce" because a phone call could go over state lines; they don't seem to have any problems raiding a farm because the crop could be transported over state lines. Etc.
So I think it quite clear that they should be equally able to justify, and in the same manner, the fact that Flint's water could go over state lines.
But of course, they'll only do things that serve them, the welfare and health of the people aren't exactly first-line considerations. No, there are more important things to do: lobbyists waiting in the anteroom, insider information on stocks to be considered, after-office speech agreements to be negotiated, and of course, for the Republican demographic of the ruling oligarchy's minions, the crafting of yet another useless attempt to block the ACA in order to pander to the very people who decided... they'd rather have Trump. Ooops. :)
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
You might also try to find where claiming one is an unbiased aggregator is in itself against the law.
Might I remind you of the Fox News slogan? Here 'tis: "Fair and Balanced"
Now please excuse me, I have to go wash my mouth out with something less toxic. Like cyanide.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
The guidelines show human intervention -- and therefore editorial decisions -- at almost every stage of Facebook's trending news operation, a team that at one time was as few as 12 people.
My god, next there'll be humans writing the articles! Where will the madness end?!
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
I'm shocked I say, simply shocked!
a) am not surprised, and b) don't care.
Anyone who tried posting on FB during this period knows that facebook has a huge impact on voters. The responsibility for weak minds still lies with the voters, but these social media and new media companies have figured out ways to quell dissent and have a very large impact in determining the perceived outcome. I suspect behind the scenes it is still business as usual though. Elections are determined by delegates. The two parties are the ones who really make the decision for the rest of the followers.
Well no shit, Sherlock!
Every now and then, technology intersects strongly with politics, such as when restrictions on information or technology or abuse of either are enshrined in law. Such is the case with surveillance, global warming, GMO labelling, workplace non-discrimination, and many other topics that hold huge interest among a large number of technology-oriented people.
When there is news in such areas, Slashdot would be remiss not to report on them. You may not like the majority opinion in such threads (and indeed the majority often has it ass backwards), but the reports are often right on topic as News for Nerds.
The solution for your lack of interest in such topics is so simple that I'm surprised that it didn't occur to you: just don't read them.
subject says it all.... News has nothing to do with Facebook, just like news for nerds has nothing to do with Slashdot now.
ok, that's not entirely true. Once upon a time Slashdot attempted to have News for nerds, but Facebook has never claimed to provide the news.
Plus, how is this supposed to be shocking? When it came out they actually said half of those things, that it's based on your likes and other preferences. Also, nobody in their right mind equates "trending" posts with "news" posts.
crap articles like this is why everyone uses Reddit now. You can still find nice subreddits with interesting members, but no choice here at Slashdot.
The real world and news is not purely black or purely white, and your claim that it can always be true/false is simply ludicrous. Just as ludicrous as your misrepresentation of what Facebook did and does with "news". Facebook does not make news, they provide stories to people allegedly based on what people are interested in. That is their sales pitch for people to use their aggregate service, and it's even named "WHAT'S TRENDING". Quite different from "WHAT WE WENT TO TREND PRETEND IT DOES".
That said, when I looked at your post history I started to smell a sockpuppet.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Apparently Lois Lerner has come out of retirement. Joseph Goebbels would be proud.
Algorithm only:
- Ten coolest cat photos of 2015
- Scientists prove vaccines cause autism
- The global warming hoax debunked.
- See celebrity sex tapes online!
- Obama's secret communist manifesto revealed.
- 30 Signs That An Eastern European Girl Isn’t Relationship Material
- Russia's nuclear ambitions and how to prepare with our five-gallon soup buckets.
- Is the dress blue or gold?
- Why the homosexual mafia is after YOUR child!
There's a reason facebook has a human team moderating the feed. Without it you'd get what people are actually doing online, and people are stupid. It'd be a mixture of inane tripe, conspiracy theories and scams, topped off by the occasional article based on blatant sexism, racism or homophobia and, of course, a bit of porn.
I wear my bad Karma like a badge of honor. Not for trolling, but for coming up with opposing viewpoints on most liberal siding subjects.
You're yesterday's news now.
Hillary for Prison 2016
Would the originators of the Internet have ever thought that Facebook would become the pinnacle of online communication?
'O brave new world, / That has such people in 't!"'
Let good algorithms work and they provide the users results from their input. This may result in things like Tay, or it may result in actually getting results from the filter bubble you're trying to build.
Both does not support injecting sponsored / endorsed content. So some human needs to add this, like paying for ads and selecting a target group. For political action, some facebook employees need to fix the trends.
Twitter at least adds a "sponsored by" to bought "trends" (not only tweets), facebook is not that transparent.
the only one that cares is your mom who reads the trending topics while reading cat memes
They are a private company and not a regulated utility. They can be politically biased if they want to be. Look at Fox "News".
There is certainly nothing wrong with choosing not to pass on material that contains blatant lies.
Of course, they may not want to admit that because they fear they will lose users.
...continues to call itself "News", Facebook can do pretty much whatever it likes. Doubters might want to take a look at this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkOKVw2TcBs
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
Lying isn't illegal, so why mention that? I mean who even thinks lying is illegal?