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.
Also eagerly supported by the WaPo, WSJ and other verified news sources.
Could they just kill clickbait articles while they're at it? Click here to find out.
KotakuInAction savages everybody's bullshit and gained most of its users after exposing a huge fake news scandal. For $ome rea$on these fake "fake news" stories never mention it.
These aren't so called citizen journalists. You are making up an alternative meaning for the phrase fake news. In reality this phrase refers to collections of websites constructed for the purpose of attracting links with inflammatory headlines, regardless of the veracity of the headline or story content. Most are run out of southeastern Europe, primarily the Balkans, due to the poor economies but availability of some for of communication network with Internet access. It is the easiest way to make money there. Efforts to identify and remove fake news have no political intent but a business motive in ensuring the utility of the Facebook network for its users.
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.
You should try reading for context and actual meaning rather than snipping quotes such that you can wildly misinterpret them.
We leave Microsoft NBC on the TV in our break room which is just annoying, because it seems like every single time I repeat something they report, I get proven wrong. How do they stay on the air?
Oh please, no one really gives a shit about sites like realcnn.ru or honesttruenewsreutersnoseriouslythisisgoodjournalism.kz; certainly not enough to justify the sudden immense effort to combat them. As Wapo overzealously laid bare in the early days of the faux outrage, the end goal is to create a vague, amorphous category that they can easily lump "bad" news outlets into in order to censor them. Breitbart runs a story you don't like? Get your Trusted Non-Partisan Fact Checkers to call them liars based on an irrelevant detail or alternative interpretation, get facebook and google to give them the scarlet "F" of #FakeNews, and any guilt liberals might experience over ignoring conflicting viewpoints magically vanishes. Concurrently wage a twitter war against their advertisers and hopefully in 5 years they're out of business completely.
It's either that, or Hillary Clinton woke up on November 9th and suddenly noticed for the first time in her fucking life that people sometimes lie on the internet and decided to add that to her list of excuses for blowing it.
Trump made up the fake news narrative. Granted Fox news was doing it and he saw that he could use it to his advantage in the presidential race and everyone in the US that has a college education knows how full of shit he is. Meanwhile the Walmart rednecks are cheering going "That there is going to make American a great island agaeein !!" despite the fact that he cheated on his taxes, Colluded with the Russians to discredit Hillary and has had his hands in several shady business dealings and has forced himself on many women and not been properly called out on it publicly.
I think that the US is in for a rude awakening if they think that this is the way to run a country. We are pretty screwed until we get a legitimate president and a legitimately elected Senate and Congress (without jerrymandered districts) and the supreme court is appointed by the president in office at the time of the vacancy coming about rather than congress delaying so they get their guy in if and only if someone from there party gets the election. (the right pulled that one out of their ass and it was not constitutional.)
I'll do my OWN fact checking thank you very much.
I don't need some partisan jackass deigning to shovel their "right-think" at me.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
The "related articles widget" amounts to little more than clutter. This is part of facebook's "chaining" mechanism, devised to increase "engagement" (at the cost of hijacking the user's media consumption flow and shortening their attention span).
The same goes for the associated "featured for you" widget, along with "people also shared" and "popular from ", and all other related garbage.
I threw together a modded version of the Facebook app, which tries to get rid of as much of this garbage as possible. This is obviously a self-signed APK, but all the patching was done in place. You are welcome to decompile it, diff it against stock, and see that all the code modifications are basically single-instruction patches (with virtually no room to include malware).
XDA link: https://forum.xda-developers.c...
Yep, the people who kept telling you there was no way Trump could get elected are now telling you what news is fake.
Now bias journalism gets checker by bias fact checkers. We'll need fact checkers to fact check the fact checkers and fact checkers to fact check those fact checkers and round and round it goes.
Alex Jones is the real deal. Do not believe the fake news coming out of his own testimony.
Perception is reality.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...
You are welcome on my lawn.
So you are unable to actually understand that a temporary immigration halt that impacts under 10% of Muslims in the world (only a tiny, tiny fraction of which would be looking to immigrate anyway) is ... something that it's not? Please explain how the current Muslim ban works. Details, please.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
I'll do my OWN fact checking thank you very much.
I don't need some partisan jackass deigning to shovel their "right-think" at me.
Donald Trump winning the election surprised me, not on election day, I knew the polls were close enough, but I expected him to implode fairly early on.
I note that because I don't get surprised a lot when it comes to politics.
I wasn't surprised when the ACA didn't destroy the healthcare system and result in some sort of NAZI or Socialist dystopia. Nor was I surprised when the proposed GOP alternative failed spectacularly because they'd been making contradictory promised for years.
I wasn't surprised when Obama's birth certificate was legit, or the ground zero mosque didn't turn into some terrorist plot, or the US military didn't invade Texas, 9/11 wasn't shown to be an inside job, or dozens of right wing personalities weren't murdered or imprisoned, or half a dozen other bone-headed "controversies" that didn't pan out.
That doesn't mean I know what's going to happen, it just means that I can differentiate between the real areas of uncertainty and groundless conspiracy theories.
That what I get with the "fact checker" world view, it's not 100% accuracy, it's the ability to avoid big surprises, and if you're reading sources that contradict these fact checkers I think you'd spend a lot of your life being shocked how none of their stories ever seem to pan out.
I stole this Sig
The "fact checkers" are just narrative checkers that rubberstamp their own articles while questioning anything not fitting their narrative.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Thirteen AMAZING reasons Facebook can't kill clickbait articles. Number seven will BLOW YOUR MIND!!!!
This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
It seems pretty clear to me at this point that those with a right/conservative perspective generally consider "fact-checkers" like Politifact to be leftist partisans, while those with a left/liberal perspective overwhelmingly consider them objective and unbiased.
If only there were some way to tell who was right.
I just want Facebook to show me stuff, not tell me what they think is true.
I already fight the FB Android app:
- Most Recent is always, ALWAYS populated with hundreds of items, despite my reading every damned one of them 2 hours ago.
- I can Like item after item, and 15 minutes later scroll back through the list and MOST are actually NOT marked 'Like' by me. Huh?
- I can read Most Recent and refresh, and the order changes. Every damned time.
- I can delete all the app data, reinstall, and get the same crap. Hundreds of items unread, when I did in fact read them.
- Recommended For Me includes crap I've been rejecting for a few years now.
The Facebook Android app royally stinks. Facebook has been manipulating my feed for years. I should trust them to fact-check? No, on several counts. Never.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
Which part? Referencing Wolf Blitzer referring to a non-existent "Muslim ban?" Or MSNBC spending a day lying about how Rachel Maddow was going to "release Trump's taxes?" Typical liberal, you, carefully avoiding the topic and going for lazy ad hominem instead. Because you sure wouldn't want to address the points being made - that would require you to acknowledge that they refer to actual things that make your preferred narrative less truthy-feeling. Can't have that. No! I love how in a discussion about fake news, you're asserting that the person relaying simple (and verifiable by you) facts is virulently ignorant. Thanks for proving my point. Good to have your help.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
+1. Where's my mod points?!
What Related Articles looks like today will shock you!
Nope, no sig
It's well understood at this point to mean ...
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean- neither more nor less."
Nope, no sig
I'll do my OWN fact checking thank you very much.
And you can continue to do so. All it does is display links to popular fact checking sites that you'll likely to go to anyway.
unless....
wait you don't do all your fact checking on infowars.com do you?
I just want Facebook to show me stuff, not tell me what they think is true.
They aren't telling you anything. They are showing you stuff. Stuff in this case is a link to others who you may or may not want to click through to in order to check if the original stuff is true.
Most Recent is always, ALWAYS populated with hundreds of items, despite my reading every damned one of them 2 hours ago.
And is it any less "most recent"? Maybe either have more friends, subscribe to more pages, like more content, etc. Lack of content is your own fault. Most recent is just that.
I can Like item after item, and 15 minutes later scroll back through the list and MOST are actually NOT marked 'Like' by me. Huh?
At some point it helps refreshing the feed.
- I can read Most Recent and refresh, and the order changes. Every damned time.
Most recent includes what your friends are doing. If someone likes something on your feed or posts to it then something on it happened more recently than some thing you just probably already read since you're refreshing.
Hundreds of items unread, when I did in fact read them.
.... Did you download the app from Facebook or from some Chinese sideload store?
Recommended For Me includes crap I've been rejecting for a few years now.
They are called ads. Facebook doesn't care what you've rejected if someone else has given them money to put it on your feed.
The Facebook Android app royally stinks. Facebook has been manipulating my feed for years. I should trust them to fact-check? No, on several counts. Never.
Fortunately they don't fact check. But then general feed manipulation in something they are tailoring algorithms to weigh up personal interest with sponsorship is something very different than an algorithm that simply redirects everything to snopes or a google search. Or maybe I'm over thinking it, it could be simpler like simply flagging everything my mother reposts as false would give a pretty good accuracy rating.
Hey, look! Still making my point for me! Thanks.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
This is simply another fail policy; fact checking of late has be shown to to be biased.
Of course it has. And Hilary Clinton is a Reptoid from the Hollow Earth and Donald Trump has been negotiating with gray aliens for the cure to cancer. Do not believe the people who tell you these are not facts. They're biased.
Breakfast served all day!
'. Did you download the app from Facebook or from some Chinese sideload store?'
really. you think so?
i'm not anywhere that stupid.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
I'm just at a loss. Everything else in your post is explainable.
There's also the utter inability to read every Most Recent post - and the remarkable, uncanny consistency of the number of unread posts, which usually stays at the very same number. For days. No matter how many I read.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.