Slashdot Mirror


Facebook Shows Related Articles and Fact Checkers Before You Open Links (techcrunch.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: Facebook wants you to think about whether a headline is true and see other perspectives on the topic before you even read the article. In its next step against fake news, Facebook today begins testing a different version of its Related Articles widget that normally appears when you return to the News Feed after opening a link. Now Facebook will also show Related Articles including third-party fact checkers before you read an article about a topic that many people are discussing. If you saw a link saying "Chocolate cures cancer!" from a little-known blog, the Related Article box might appear before you click to show links from the New York Times or a medical journal noting that while chocolate has antioxidants that can lower your risk for cancer, it's not a cure. If an outside fact checker like Snopes had debunked the original post, that could appear in Related Articles too. Facebook says this is just a test, so it won't necessarily roll out to everyone unless it proves useful. It notes that Facebook Pages should not see a significant change in the reach of their News Feed posts. There will be no ads surfaced in Related Articles.

8 of 119 comments (clear)

  1. The Ministry of Truth by thesjaakspoiler · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Also eagerly supported by the WaPo, WSJ and other verified news sources.

    1. Re: The Ministry of Truth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I see they are hooked into fact checkers with a liberal bias. If facts are facts, surely adding a conservative source wouldn't hurt, and would generate identical results.

      Unless the carefully selected fact checkers are partisan hacks. Perish the thought!

    2. Re: The Ministry of Truth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Riiiiiiiiiiight

      The Thought Police have entered the building.

    3. Re: The Ministry of Truth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      More like the so called "conservative fact checkers" are partisan bullshit and Snopes is in fact only bias to fact.

      Snopes doesnt have a liberal bias you fucking idiot

    4. Re:The Ministry of Truth by JoshuaZ · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The WSJ is right-wing and has a wildly different editorial slant than the Washington Post. If you've decided that the problem is with both the WSJ and WaPo, then the problem is most likely on your end, not theirs.

  2. Re:MSNBC verified by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Could they just kill clickbait articles while they're at it? Click here to find out.

  3. Re:Is anyone falling for this? by ScentCone · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You are making up an alternative meaning for the phrase fake news.

    Nah. It's well understood at this point to mean, "People using widely consumed platforms to spread information they know is incorrect, and doing so while presenting those lies as facts." So, when someone on CNN says there is a "Muslim ban," they know they're lying and that they're producing and spreading fake news. You know they are, their informed audience knows it's fake, and some small number of non-critical-thinking dolts take it as fact. But it's fake news. Click-bait factories in Eastern Europe are NOT the only or even a predominant source of this. Most of it comes right out of mainstream media habitats right in the US.

    It is the easiest way to make money there.

    It's true. When an operation like MSNBC spends an entire news cycle hyping the fact that their head fake-news-talking-head is going to "release Trump's taxes," when they know perfectly well they have no such thing and will do no such thing (except a readily available snipped that - even by itself - undermines their own narrative) ... when that happens, and they get a big ratings boost from that lie, yeah - easy money if they don't care about the fact they have to lie to do it.

    Efforts to identify and remove fake news have no political intent

    Hilarious.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  4. Re:MSNBC verified by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yep, the people who kept telling you there was no way Trump could get elected are now telling you what news is fake.