Slashdot Mirror
Facebook Offers Political Bias Training In Wake Of Trending Controversy (gizmodo.com)
Michael Nunez, reporting for Gizmodo:Facebook is adding political scenarios to its orientation training following concerns, first reported by Gizmodo, that workers were suppressing conservative topics in its Trending news section. Sheryl Sandberg, Facebook's chief operating officer, announced the change during an interview with conservative leader Arthur Brooks, president of the prominent conservative think tank the American Enterprise Institute. Brooks also attended a private meeting between Facebook executives and prominent conservative leaders following the controversy. "We had an ex-contractor on that team who accused us of liberal bias," Sandberg said during the interview. "Frankly, it rang true to some people because there is concern that Silicon Valley companies have a liberal bias. We did a thorough investigation, and we didn't find a liberal bias."
We did a thorough investigation, and we didn't find a liberal bias.
Biased group looks at self, finds no bias.
If they found no bias, why are they adding the training?
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
Everyone knows that the truth has a strong bias toward whichever political party we happen to support. Any investigation of bias can also take this into account and therefore show it does not exist. However, it also means we can perceive bias and there can be actual bias where others do not intend to be acting in a biased way.
Real communication is about getting past talking points and ad hominem attacks, of course. About questioning our own beliefs and those of our fellow human beings, and building compromises that drive society forward. About questioning our own biases and being able to work with those whose biases are different. The best is almost always the enemy of the good, in large part because we will always find much more disagreement over what is best.
Real lawyers write in C++
...the NRA did a thorough investigation, and didn't find a conservative bias.
National Rifle Association founded in 1871. Are you referring to the the oldest civil rights group in america?
in other other news the obama DOJ investigated itself and found no wrongdoing
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
The bias doesn't disturb me. It's the intolerance of opposing views.
As I've always said, if you can't argue the opposing view on any contentious topic, you don't understand the topic and shouldn't hold a strong view. It's so damn easy to attribute the opposing view to malice or trolling, as it takes no effort.
This always pissed me off growing up, when some on the religious right would claim that gays were only have same-sex sex out of a desire to be evil, not a sincere desire for the same sex. Total lack of understanding. More recently I've seem the exact same ignorance in reverse, where people on the progressive left would claim that the only reason conservatives could oppose gay marriage was hatred of gays, and no other reason was sincere. Same total lack of understanding.
Intolerance of opposing views comes mostly from ignorance of the rationale for those views, which is simple intellectual laziness. The worst part is, people seem proud of this ignorance.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Nah.
Facebook didn't have a policy of ignoring certain news sources or stories.
But it did hire people to do the filtering, and most of those people were recent journalism graduates from liberal universities. It shouldn't surprise anyone that the end result was biased reporting, whether that was the stated intent or not.
The NRA will never "return to its roots as a promoter of firearms education and safety" - it is the purchase enforcement arm of the weapon manufacturer industry. What the "liberals" do has nothing to do with their behavior. They will stop at nothing to use guns to take money out of the hands of Americans - the only difference between the weapon industry and muggers is that the industry is willing to give you the whole gun in exchange instead of just the bullets.
Mind you, this is coming from a gun *owner*, but let's call a flintlock a flintlock, okay?
Don't trust any concentration of power.
I'm not going to defend UKIP, but do you see the irony in labeling them "an extreme neo-Nazi group" in the comment section of an article about political bias?
I'll grant you they are a far right group with a lot of strong views towards migrants, but from what I can tell, there is no Nazi symbolism on their web site, no call for Jews or other "undesirables" to be exterminated, no stated desire to found a police state dictatorship or any other semblance of recreating the a German-style National Socialist movement.
So they don't seem very neo-Nazi to me, but you seem awfully biased by labeling them as such.
He's right. It's not a "civil right" according to the definition in the link provided, as pedantic as that is.
What it is is more important... it is a Fundamental Right, or a Civil Liberty. It is a Right that predates Governments and is not subject to Government infringement.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.