Slashdot Mirror
Facebook Disputes Gizmodo Report, Says It Never Built and Withheld Any News Feed Changes Based on Their Political Impact (slate.com)
Tech news site Gizmodo reported Monday that Facebook planned a News Feed update that would have identified fake or hoax news stories, but "disproportionately impacted right-wing news sites by downgrading or removing that content from people's feeds" so it chose to never release the update. Facebook has denied the claims in the report. A spokesperson told Slate: "The article's allegation is not true. We did not build and withhold any News Feed changes based on their potential impact on any one political party. We always work to make News Feed more meaningful and informative, and that includes examining the quality and accuracy of items shared, such as clickbait, spam, and hoaxes. Mark himself said, "I want to do everything I can to make sure our teams uphold the integrity of our products." This includes continuously review updates (sic) to make sure we are not exhibiting unconscious bias.
CNN, ABC, MSNBC, Huffpo, and every other media outlet in the country. Lie and Deny has worked pretty well against the masses for a long time. People do eventually catch on though. Hence, just before the election 76% of people said that the US was going the wrong way, media has a 6% trustworthy rating (probably lower now). The first stat was a dead giveaway that Hillary did not have a 99.8% chance of winning as polsters proclaimed on those same media outlets.
In fairness, there is certainly some bias in the little tiny bit of Right leaning media (Kelly and O'Reilly are left of center but for the sake of argument lets call them "fair"). It's so little though, very few people noticed.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Somebody may be getting sued again...
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
People that rely on fakebook for their news get exactly what they deserve. Same with people that rely on any single source for their news. Always ask yourself:
1. Is this news or gossip? (Exactly what am I being told?)
2. Why am I being told this?
3. Who is telling me this?
The answers will help you decide the truthiness of the stories.
BULLSHIT Facebook. My account was shoved into the A/B testing for this several months ago. Articles from known satirical web sites would be flagged as such, and this was such a praised feature at the time, too. We all got sick and fucking tired having to constantly link to Snopes or other resources to "prove" that a particular site was a satire site. The only real issue is that this system was primarily limited to just domains as a whole, so bullshit clickbaitery web sites that have marginal content once in a blue moon wouldn't be listed (Buzzfeed, Huffington Post, and similar)
We did not build and withhold any News Feed changes based on their potential impact on any one political party
What I see here is the use of "any one political party" which could mean that they didn't implement it because it was decided that it would impact all political parties or that it wasn't implemented because it would affect users (not political parties).
I just don't trust any PR statement.... they are bound to be carefully crafted to be "true" without actually being so.
My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
You "progressives" who LOVE to label everyone who doesn't slurp your Kool-Aid as a "RAAAACIST!!!!" or "HOMOPHOBE" will HATE this!
As a moderate conservative, I can reassure you that people who are racist and homophobic are racist and homophobic, can't stand the idea that it's unacceptable to be racist and homophobic in the 21st century, and cringe at being labeled racist and homophobic in public.
They do a fair bit of herding people and hiding content. First they determine a persons political status, then they only show you stories based on your favorites, while avoiding triggering stories. They limit/censor what posts show up in your feeds. They have multiple lawsuits on leaving hate groups that they agree with, anti-Israel, gun groups, conservative media. Its not even a guess, its already been verified by multiple media outlets.
Everyone knows they jumped the shark, as a discussion medium it sucks.
Which of the two is the fake/hoax news story?
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Thiel was no longer gay simply because who he voted for. A mother of a 7 year old kicked him out of the house for voting in a mock election for Trump.
Dude did you just sleep thjrough the entire year ? Really? That's all you got? One bad parent? Meanwhile Trump is the dude who is a proven sexual predator, racist hate monger and being sued for running a scam (as the judge said) university. Yeah, but both sides are basically the same. uh huh. Yeah...
The Left have become extremist whackos doing anything they can for power including violence, bigotry, xenophobia, homophobia, and every other thing they accuse others of doing.
Like what?
You are deluded, in your right wing echo chamber, the media is biased because they report the actual words Trump said, its just like insisting reality is biased. What a moron.
Except some people really are racist and homo-phobes. Like Steve Bannon, Trump's advisor. That dude is white supremacist fck head.
The media reported the facts. Trump said a lot of sexist, xenophobic, racist nonsense. And the media reported it.
The media reported facts? Well that's debatable, very debatable. It would be like saying, the UVA rape case was factual because "Rolling Stone created a dialog." Something that many 3rd wave feminists(Valenti, Bindle, etc) like to spout. It's neither factual, or truthful. If the trust of the media is lower then congress, it's not a people problem. It's a media problem. Going by your reasoning, Clinton and Kaine said a lot of misandrist, sexist and racist things. The only difference was, the media was in the tank for Clinton and Kaine. The problem with screaming "he's a racist/sexist/xenophobic" identity politics garbage all the time is that when it actually is the case, nobody cares anymore. Then again, the standard that people seem to believe is racist/xenophobic is enforcing border laws and deporting illegals. Sexist of course are now things that are consensual, because "it's dirty". Strange that last one, who knew that the religious right would be dead but their views would be taken up by the non-religious left.
And in the case of the media instead of learning from it, they're doubling down. That also goes for the pundits spouting the same garbage. And it appears that people are doubling down too, but keep digging.
Om, nomnomnom...
Like what?
Not been paying attention to the flagrant uses of identity politics by democrats and people on the left over the last 8-12 years? If you want a person to be hired based on merit, well merit is a MRA construct. Merit is also sexist/racist and homophobic. Not wanting to hire somebody based on the characteristics that they're born with is also sexist/racist/homophobic and so on. The left have also been the ones at the forefront of pushing the "diversity hires" not on skill, not on ability, not on merit. But again, because of what a person identifies as, or from what they're born with.
To repeat myself from the previous week:
Why does it matter? Why do you want to force people into positions that they don't want? Why do you believe that someones genitals, or sexual identity is important? Do you also believe the same thing about an individuals race? Why does it seem your most important qualification to hire someone, or have them in office is something that they're born with.
All of those things? If you want to put people a head of others based on characteristics that they were born with instead of their skill, ability, or the earned merit that they gained from hard work. You're no different then a sexist that believed that only men could be doctors or politicians in the 1910's and earlier. Or a racist in the 1960's that believed those "blacks and/or mexicans" could never be educated enough to succeed.
Om, nomnomnom...
Perhaps there is simply a correlation between political affiliation and lying?
The word "homophobic" was popularized by homosexuals themselves, And the word "Islamophobic" was crafted by Muslim supporters to imply that their critics were crazy.
(||) Nehmo (||)
conservatives talk like that because they, delusionally, think welfare still exists.
Hint: it was killed in the 90's by Bill Clinton working with the GOP Congress, and replaced with TANF, aka, workfare.
TANF on the other hand is a limited block grant to the states of 16billion dollars (total, not each) that has never been increased or adjusted for inflation (so its lost more than 35% of its value), with work requirements and a lifetime cap, that the states get to spend on whatever they want. most don't spend it on poverty, but instead on their own budget holes.
Welfare used to be an entitlement for anyone making below X amount of dollars. As such it was received by >95% of those that qualified.
TANF is received by less than 8% of those who would otherwise qualify. The majority of the funds go to shore up state budget holes under the many loopholes in the law.
Welfare was a hand up . Provably demonstrably so, regardless of any and all BS from the conservative side, that reduced poverty.
TANF doesn't work and doesn't reduce poverty.
So when conservatives, like you, say that welfare doesn't work, its just like when they say government doesn't work: its because they broke it, so they could then say SEE! IT DOESNT WORK! (with much help from a far too trusting and optimistic Clinton).
---
No one has declared Thiel not gay any more than they declared his brother asshat Milo not gay.
they have rather both been labeled as toxic disgusting people....because they are.
Not because of their orientation, but because of the things say and do.
---
The Left have become extremist whackos doing anything they can for power including violence, bigotry, xenophobia, homophobia, and every other thing they accuse others of doing. Look at facts and see who does this stuff, it sure as hell ain't the right. In fairness it's not even people in the democratic party, it's the whackadoo people pushing communist ideology.
Pure projection.
Also: you apparently are unfamiliar with the definition of communist.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
Most people cringe at being called racist or homophobe, that why it's been such a powerful tool for silencing dissent.
The reality is everyone is racist to some extent. If someone accused me of being racist, I won't deny it. But an accusation of being racist isn't enough to silent my dissent.
Except of course your false equivalency is based on RWNJ lies about Clintion. Going to be fun when you realise the truth.
As Trump said in 1998, he would run as a republican, they are the dumbest voters, and would believe anything he said. Sure sounds like he understands you.