Slashdot Mirror


Mark Zuckerberg Announces Facebook Will Fight Fake News -- Next To An Ad With Fake News (facebook.com)

An anonymous reader writes: "We take misinformation seriously," Facebook's CEO announced in a late-night status update Friday. "Our goal is to connect people with the stories they find most meaningful, and we know people want accurate information. We've been working on this problem for a long time and we take this responsibility seriously. We've made significant progress, but there is more work to be done."

But you know what's funny? The ad to the right of Zuck's post is fake news. It has the headline "Hugh Hefner Says 'Goodbye' at 90" and a quote from his wife saying "I can't believe he is actually gone," even though Hugh Hefner isn't dead. And clicking through, it's just another lame ad for erectile dysfunction -- on a site that's been tricked up to look like Fox News.

I saw it too. (Here's my screenshot... And yes, it did link to an advertising site with a fake "Fox News" banner across the top.) Oh, the irony. "The CEO said that Facebook is working to develop stronger fake news detection, a warning system, easier reporting and technical ways to classify misinformation," reports CNN, adding "Zuckerberg did not say how quickly the measures would be in place." They also quote Zuckerberg as saying "Some of these ideas will work well, and some will not." But apparently it's pretty easy to get fake news onto Facebook. You just have to pay them.

21 of 149 comments (clear)

  1. evidence? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Would have been nice to post a screenshot since the ads change with every page load. As far as I can tell this is completely made up.

    1. Re:evidence? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      So you are saying this is fake news?

    2. Re:evidence? by lgw · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Would have been nice to post a screenshot since the ads change with every page load. As far as I can tell this is completely made up.

      Also, the idea that you can get Facebook to post lies by paying them is their entire business model. OK, OK, the 99% of marketing that is lies give the other 1% a bad name, sure, but really - any advertising-based business is the business of displaying lies for money.

      Whipslash really seems to like his "daily story about why you shouldn't use Facebook" though, so I guess we're doomed to repeat this discussion.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  2. This just in by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2

    This is fake news. Or that was. Or will be.

    Unless it's an advert - then it's real.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  3. Funny by mwvdlee · · Score: 5, Funny

    But you know what's funny? The ad to the right of Zuck's post is fake news. It has the headline "Hugh Hefner Says 'Goodbye' at 90"

    You wanna know what else is funny? Those ads are personalized. You're the only one seeing a Hugh Hefner-related ad, you perv.

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    1. Re:Funny by lgw · · Score: 2

      People think there is something perverse about anything related to Hugh Hefner.

      No, really, if you find Hugh Hefner sexy you're working a fairly bizarre fetish there.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    2. Re: Funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      He is a misogynist

      Thanks! Now I know he's probably not a misogynist. Do you have anymore knee-jerk epithets so I can know he's probably not any of those things too?

    3. Re:Funny by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      A great many women find that tolerable, especially if the guy is 102.

      ftfy

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    4. Re: Funny by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2

      Hefner's not a misogynist. He just loves pussy. An unlike a certain urinal cake on his way to the White House, Hefner understands that you're not supposed to grab that pussy unless you're invited to do so.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
  4. Facebook is a bad joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'll be glad when this 'social media' fad blows over finally and people go back to valuing privacy.

  5. Fake news, ok, but what about lies? by Fragnet · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The biggest lies I see on news channels these days are lies of omission. It's not really what they are telling you that's important, it's what they aren't telling you.

    1. Re:Fake news, ok, but what about lies? by lgw · · Score: 2

      Deciding what political statements are true and not cannot help but introduce political bias. That's why the government can't be allowed to play a role. If Facebook wants to, well, it's their site, but I'm betting any such effort leads to a stronger echo chamber, rather than "more truth".

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    2. Re:Fake news, ok, but what about lies? by Fragnet · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You know what this looks like to an averagely sceptical reader? It looks like certain people, mostly on the left, think that "fake news" was the reason people voted Trump instead of Clinton. It's true that Hillary lost due to fake news, but it wasn't fake news from Trump supporters. It was fake news from her own supporters. Headlines from publications like Huffington saying that she had a 98% chance of winning resulted in many liberals staying home. Trump didn't do that much better than Romney last time.

      All I'm seeing is an appeal to censor political opponents.

    3. Re: Fake news, ok, but what about lies? by stonedown · · Score: 2

      Why do so many people feel compelled to post in Slashdot without knowing anything about the topic?

      https://www.google.com/amp/amp...

      That's just one example.

  6. Clinton Machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The Clinton propaganda machine wasn't happy about losing the election. There were a lot of dirty tricks they tried and still managed to fail. The mainstream news didn't cover all of her corruption and decided to ignore it. As a progressive I had to turn to the "alt right" news sources to inform myself on the truth of various matters. Now the democrats are being sore losers and want to eliminate the first amendment of the Constitution.

      If you let the government censor one form of speech don't be surprised when they start coming after other forms of speech.

    1. Re: Clinton Machine by ScentCone · · Score: 2

      If the RNC had done their job we wouldn't have a fascist in the White House.

      You're kind of foggy on the whole what-words-mean thing, aren't you.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  7. It is going to be like the battle against SPAM by QuietLagoon · · Score: 2

    Continuous and ongoing. With the big unanswered question: what is fake news? Before Zuck can screen it out, he needs to define it.

  8. It's not Facebook's Fault. by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's the lack of Internet.

    I was curious about these 'fake news' sites and started reading a few. They loaded fast I looked at the source code and it looks like I could have written it by hand. These pages are optimized for people that lack access to broadband. FreeRepublic is a bare bones site. This is what a forum post looks like. I spent a few minutes trying to figure out if an ad blocker had taken out some obnoxious ad or something.

    I know it may be difficult to understand for those in cities but we have shit internet out here. Even at 25/3 my wife complains about how slow some shopping sites load. Gone are the days of being able to surf the web on dialup.

    Unfortunately that's what some people are stuck with. I moved 2 years ago and started attending the local town hall meetings, 'broadband meetings' and doing what ever I could to improve the internet in my rural part of the US. A lot of townships are on dialup, some have cable, some have DSL. In households earning less than $34k/year that have K-12 kids 50% have internet. I live in what I consider a fairly 'normal' area. I don't even want to guess what internet adoption looks like in more rural parts of the US. [And for those in ivory towers wondering what we mean when we say 'we feel left behind' this is part of it.]

    These 'fake' news sites are likely the only 'news' sites that some of these people can access. And when they post material that they agree with it just amplifies the echo chamber. Huffington Post's front page weighed in at 7 MB. Even if there are people that might be on the fence and want to go out research other opinions they often can't. They flat out physically have no way to get other information.

    If any hard core liberals really want to get back at Trump supporters run Fiber out to everywhere. It's easy to mock someone as ignorant when they have literally no way of learning any better.

    That said, where the hell are the web page benchmarking tools? I've been using https://pageweight.imgix.com/ but I can't automate that. My interest is piqued and I really want to do a statistical difference between "liberal" and "conservative" (and "real" and "fake") news sites.

    1. Re:It's not Facebook's Fault. by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 2

      First, double check your math. 7 MB / (25 Mbps) = 2.25s

      25 megabits per second

      This is the technological equivalent of 'let them eat cake'.

      How long does it take to load on a 0.9MBps connection?

      How long does it take to load on dialup?

      satellite connection

      Which is expensive and out of the reach of a lot of people.

      Like I said once: 50% of households earning less than $34k/year don't have internet. Period. Not 56k, not 0.9 Mbps, not 25 Mbps. None. How long does 7 MB to load at 0.00 Mbps? It's not like with the Rural Electrification Act that forced someone to run them power or POTS. Comcast says we're not profitable. DSL says we're not profitable and then you wonder why people feel forgotten.

  9. tr by castus · · Score: 2

    "We take misinformation seriously,"

    We take bad PR seriously

    "Our goal is to connect people with the stories they find most meaningful,

    Out goal is to connect people with advertisers

    we know people want accurate information.

    Dumb fucks

    We've been working on this problem for a long time and we take this responsibility seriously. We've made significant progress, but there is more work to be done."

    We might start working on it if the media won't stop whining soon

  10. Facebook? by jwymanm · · Score: 2

    Am I the only one that doesn't even know that Facebook had news? I assume everything on FB is just Ads. It's every single damn "news" paper out there that seems to be doing fake news or lets face it 99% opinions and 1% reports. You can't even read news.google.com anymore (now I'm guessing it is probably safe to assume you couldn't before either without heavy customization). Sigh. I almost think Facebook is a fall guy from the real fake news places so they could pin everything on anyone but them.