Slashdot Mirror
Facebook Pages Spreading Fake News Won't Be Able To Buy Ads (techcrunch.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: Facebook says it's taking another step against Pages that share fabricated news stories. The company has already been working with outside fact-checkers like Snopes and the AP to flag inaccurate news stories. (These aren't supposed to be stories that are disputed for reasons of opinion or partisanship, but rather outright hoaxes and lies.) It also says that when a story is marked as disputed, the link can can no longer be promoted through Facebook ads. The next step, which the company is announcing today, involves stopping Pages that regularly share these stories from buying any Facebook ads at all, regardless of whether or not the ad includes a disputed link. In this case, Leathern said blocking ad-buying is meant to change the economic incentives. Facebook is concerned that "there are Pages posting this information that are using Facebook Ads to build audiences" to spread false news. By changing the ad policy, Facebook makes it harder for companies to attract that audience.
Since the people vetting the ads are almost all leftists, it'd be easy for them to decree something as non-fact.
They're vetting themselves.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Now there is something I would have never expected. Facebook a real world news source.
Going to get really interesting in a year or 2. Can Facebook be a real news source and the Epicenter of the Zuck for President Universe.
Facebook and Snopes are functionally the same entity.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
It's not about fact, but about pushing the PC narrative.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Links, or else you're making it up.
And any valid potlical opinion 'people' might disagree with will be labeled 'extremist', 'alt-right', 'racist', 'inciting hatred', or simply 'nazi', and disappeared, no matter if it is actually true or not. And whoever controls the censors gets to decide what is true and what is not.
Finally, us Holohaux exposers can buy ads! I mean, since they won't let fake news groups buy ads, that must mean that those exposing the Holohaux are allowed to buy the ads, right?
You'll never get any to a site that isn't yet another bullshit factory. Don't bother, these people are unhinged and only get more so the more bullshit they surround themselves with.
It's easy to see where this is heading. Next will be the deletion of Facebook pages that spread so-called fake news. Or anything Facebook finds objectionable.
In the recent past, the simple work-around would be buy a domain name and link to such content hosted somewhere. However, GoDaddy, Dreamhost, Network Solutions, and others have now taken it upon themselves to, in effect, censor content by deleting the domain name associated with any site they find objectionable.
Interesting how many internet neutrality proponents are all for it except when it concerns content and expression they don't like. Seems to me that domain name registrars, DNS providers, co-location facilities, ISPs, communication providers, and network access points should all be considered common carrier utilities and not permitted to arbitrarily block usage nor content unless dictated so by law.
win-win
The couple that runs it admitted over a decade ago that they were biased Al Gore supporters and to not trust them with anything political. I respect them for being honest.
Citation?
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Either snopes covers more right wing stories because a) snopes is biased, or b) right wing believes are based on false information.
Slashdot are going to start losing ad revenue soon once advertisers realise that the only people still reading Slashdot are the alt-right and their associated sock accounts. I mean, the only thing these wingnuts buy are tiki torches.
I respect them for admitting their bias, but when Soros admitted to working for Nazis, but Snopes claimed that was wrong, I lost all respect for them.
I don't mind the ads for fast food, toys, and even movies, but some of the scamvertisements I see make me realize there are too many people out there willing to lie, cheat, and defraud anybody they can take money from.
The Sarlaac pits are too good for them.
All advertising that DOES make it to me, will now be 100% flatly IGNORED. I want UNBIASED content. When you bias it, I go into UBER IGNORE mode. Censorship is BS, as are those who engage in it!
That was good of them to be honest of their bias.
Neither Facebook, Snopes, any media organization, or even the SPLC have any impartiality here. All are run by far left organizations.
You only believe in them when you believe what they are selling. It says more about you really.
"They bought their tickets. They knew what they were getting into. I say let them crash."
NOW !!!
5 out of 6 people enjoy Russian Roulette & 6 out of 7 Dwarfs are not Happy
Now they'll get even less traffic.
"A plan fiendishly clever in its intricacies"- Homer Simpson
Don't bother, the Putinbots are here. No proof will satisfy them.
Snopes of course publishes its evidence and sources on the page, for anyone to check.
The US government is run by right wing extremists. Only now even nuttier farther right extremists want their share.
Conservatives upset that belief can be dismissed on the same basis as was used to submit it.
Libertarians upset that "privatizing truth" is what the free market decided upon.
Liberals upset that moral relativism can be fact checked.
The only winning move is not to use facebook.
Inheritance is the sincerest form of nepotism.
The most right-wing party in Denmark (in government, not Nazis and that far-right BS) almost verges the American Democrats party. A guy like Bernie Sanders would be center/slightly right-wing in Denmark.
Snopes was right to ignore his work for the Nazis.
Hmmmmm.... imperfect stability or genocidal scum, not exactly a tough call to make given those two choices. Of course, it would help if your characterisation of "the powers that be" were accurate, but even if it were it's demonstrably false. A notable example being the Weimar Republic letting Hitler make some decisions, which went really well for them.
Jesus christ, one fucking page of comments without some left versus right fight.
All I ask.
It's just sad that so many people pretend to not know that the couple that ran Snopes admitted their bias.
Serious question.
The couple admitted to their bias.
As if the couple admitting to their bias wasn't enough?
True, but they since got a divorce. Maybe one of them isn't as biased.
Why was Snopes right to ignore Trumpf's daddy's work for the Nazis? Because that was Kochs. Papa Trumpf was a Klansman.
Why are people getting their news from Facebook anyway? It's scary that the fate of democracy is dependent upon people who are so disinterested in the world.
Come on over to CNN, you'll fit in here!
Before "We verified your page contains one or more stories which are outright hoaxes" becomes "While your page meets our criteria of accuracy we feel the content therein contains misleading and potentially offensive content."
Too bad the moderators here voted you down even though the couple that owned Snopes admitted to their bias. They're ignoring reality.
This. I don't understand why morons pretend that didn't happen.
A bit of unintentional humor there, I see.
They did so I don't understand the ostrich head in the sand view of the mods here.
This. Soros was forced to turn in his fellow Jews.
Proof of that shouldn't be hard to find, yet I see 3+ people claiming it with no proof. Who's telling the truth here?
It's irrelevant to me, but you don't do yourself favors by omitting sources.
Can we just get a "bullshit" button next to the like button?
Then maybe I wouldn't have to block 60% of the people listed as "friends".
The fact is you're a lying faggot seth. Just. Like. Trump.
He'd be so proud of your lack of any male characteristics, you bitch.
Alt-right or Kremlin hireling? It's sometimes hard to tell, but here I put the odds at 30:70 in favour of the Kremlin.
I've used snopes.com many times but found it behind most of the time. Just today linked from fark.com: "Health professionals report cases where people put sunscreen on their eyeballs to watch eclipse" http://www.foxnews.com/health/...
sunscreen +eclipse site:snopes.com - Nada on all variations.
People telling lies about politics won't be able to make money from people telling lies about their products.
Reality has a well-known liberal bias.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
What about sites like The Onion or Ironic Times?
Were the Weimar Republic the right-hand in the sense that they took the moral high-ground?
Then cite the interview. Back up your claims or admit that you've got nothing. Those are the only choices you have.
... fake news is easy to identify. It's not a matter of bias, it's a matter of fact.
Either something happened or it didn't.
It's not hard.
However, why in tarnation is anybody getting their real goddam news on fucking Facebook?
That's the question.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Uhhhh, they've both shown they're biased.
It's just sad that some people still use them as a citation even after they admitted their bias.
If it happened then citations should be forthcoming.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Well over a decade ago. Anyone that still quotes them is just damn dishonest.
As soon as you say that "Reality has a well-known liberal bias." someone tries to hide the truth by modding it down.
Basically proving the point.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
I respect them for admitting their bias.
By genocidal scum, of course, you mean the republicans, who started with Sherman's deliberate destruction of the infrastructure and economy, and then followed with sending the carpetbaggers to replace the politically powerful. Then theyused the schools to whitewash the cause of the war; brainwashing the children to believe that it was only about slavery. Welfare money was then used to create dependency on the federal government, with the deliberate aim of weakening families and communities. Follow with two rounds of economic warfare, the first selling off the industrial capacity followed by environmental regulation to prohibit the rebuilding, and now a media campaign to label southern cultures as merely an expression of racism. the progressiv s are going full Taliban now with tearing down the symbols of the culture they wish to destroy,mans will shortly follow with "hate crime" legislation to ban the religion.
Yes, I tell you, the fit wing is clearly genocidal.
I respect them for admitting their bias. They are leftists.
And wow, now I'm getting downmodded for wanting someone to demonstrate the veracity of their assertion.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Serious answer.
And the couple that runs Snopes admitted to that.
Bill Clinton feared the open internet in 1995
http://www.breitbart.com/big-j...
> Three years before Matt Drudge changed the world and how news
> would be consumed, President Bill Clinton's White House feared
> that the Internet was allowing average citizens, especially conservatives,
> to bypass legacy gatekeepers and access information that had
> previously been denied to them by the mainstream press.
Hillary Clinton whining about an internet "Without any kind of editing function or gatekeeping function"
http://www.freerepublic.com/fo...
Apparently CNN (Clinton News Network) wasn't winning the battle for hearts and minds, so the Democrats wanted to destroy Breitbart website... Hillary Campaign Vows To Destroy Opposition Website
http://dailycaller.com/2016/08...
I'm not repeating myself
I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
This. The couple admitted to their bias.
This. The couple that run Snopes admitted thei bias.
But too many people pretend they didn't admit their bias.
Sorry you feel that way.
They admitted their bias.
It's all about perspective
https://youtu.be/HrN-GPYIcbQ
READY.
PRINT ""+-0
This. They are not an unbiased source.
Komsomolskaya Pravda, Tass, Izvestiya or ROFL "snopes.com", who am I going to trust?
Otvet: KP, Tass and Izvestiya ;-)
And Papa Soros is a Nazi and a pedophile, your point is what again?
That is correct. I don't see how anyone could believe them after they admitted their bias.
And therefore you know why they have selected it?
This is just another 'cut off the funding to anyone who we dont agree with/like/feel share our morality/spoke against us/etc..'
Kind of like the Obama driven banking attack on the 'immorals' isnt it.
Totalitarianist regimes likes to paint their power grabs as 'morality' and 'fairness', oldest play in the book.
The Stalinists did it, the Maoists did it, the Nazis did it.. I have little doubt that the Romans, Greeks, etc etc did it also.
I would be surprised in good old Ghengis didnt play that game also.
Here's that good old people can't be moral without religion argument we know and love so much. Thank God for the penultimate moral high ground huh? Trumps all other arguments.
You make a good point. God forgetting to put "Thou shalt not fuck children" explains the Catholic Church pretty well.
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
Can we please just change model away from the "political spectrum". Otherwise it just becomes a game of everyone calling all right-wings Hitler and all left-wings Stalin. Let's make it a political forest where we have a bunch of political trees such as conservatives, liberals, libertarians, progressive conservatives, etc. That are all able to have their own political stance without this game of strawman shovong eachother into political stances that nether side actually believes. Oh, on a side note this site is called slashdot. It's a site about technology.
Ah. I made typos. *The model*, *shoving*. I really wish slashdot gave us a way to edit typos. Just give us a 2 minute window or something. It's way too easy to typo on mobile especially when the input field shows 5 lines of text.
Based on their existence, I have to assume the religious rules were necessary at the time. People are entirely capable of being moral on the own, but even in current society religion is needed to keep some people in line. Whether it be for the instilled morals, or for the feeling that life and what you do with it matters.
about how much fake news there is, you should all be happy that fake news is being defunded.
Then this is a good sign. Only a Nazi would see it as bad.
You see it as bad.
The conclusion is pretty clear.
Sorry, you lose.
Nonsense. People break religious rules all the time, the rules aren't keeping them in line.
Religious prescription against murder, rape, incest, etc are because societies recognise those things as undesirable, so any religion claiming moral authority reflects that societal opinion to avoid the inherent credibility hit.
Hence ISIS with their murderous ways being rejected by other muslims. Whether Islam is made up bullshit or not, the ISIS interpretation of it failed to garner widespread support.
Religion as a whole is a population control tool, but human societies tend towards moral codes anyway and religion in no way keeps anybody 'in line'. If anything, quite the opposite - or should I cite ISIS again?
is the spreader and should put itself out of business.
Nothing else my mom would see is as bad as extremest on facebook.
Using Snopes as a fact checker is literally like asking a few random people on the Internet to google stuff for you.
Literally, it's a small staff with well established biases (note: we all have biases, they aren't special or especially bad in this regard), and are hardly authoritative on any subject at all.
Their "refutation" of Pizzagate was literally citing a Washington Post article (who Podesta writes and consults for, among other things) which declared it an unfounded conspiracy theory without looking at any of the underlying data or points, some of which were pretty well documented (for example, Hillary interceding with Haiti to get Laura Silsby freed - who was allegedly involved with child trafficking there, or the Podesta's brothers bizarre art collection depicting murder and child torture, or Bill and Hillary Clinton's many trips on the Lolita Express to Epstein's private island). This is simply a type of normalcy bias. There's some really shady stuff associated with the Podesta brothers and the Clinton circle. It wasn't all fake news.
..from at least two sites, registered to the same washington PR firm before they tried to anonymize the registrations, that only just became active prior to the election, that were running attack stories against Trump.
I find it terribly hard to believe that these sites, with no readership, got trended without MASSIVE fake account usage, or more likely - with the cooperation of the Facebook editorial team.
Leaves me in doubt that 'Fake News' will be policed, but just another mechanism being put in place to suppress information.
Ordering crazy by the sackload seemed like an economy at the time!
If you don't care enough about your comment to proofread and preview, a two minute window isn't going to help.
The "political spectrum" is a consequence of U.S. politics. Because they use voting systems that favour a two-party state, there's little use for the political compass in the U.S. Everything is ultimately for or against one of the two parties.
Fanatically anti-fanatical
So are they blocking the proper noun Pages, the commercial product by Apple, or are they blocking pages, the general noun? Editing fail.
So does this mean that the Democratic party and CNN are both banned from advertising on Facebook?
This seems like a very nice approach. Nobody's being censored this way, and making BS less profitable will certainly reduce the amount of it being made.
All anyone has to do to stop a source from buying Facebook ads is to mark it as disputed? So the left can dispute conservative media, and the right can dispute mainstream media, and neither party can then promote their material with ads?
If implemented evenly, this would lead to bots and crowdsourced armies to dispute the other side. If not implemented evenly it will simply shut down unpopular speech.
Well, whatever that was, it didn't last long.
Have gnu, will travel.
Why don't you spend two minutes proofreading your post before you submit it?
Bastardizations are an issue, but those issues are much more prevalent in an atheistic society (USSR, China)
Yeah, now show me how great the mentioned countries are in comparison.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
A few people on the top. The 99% below them and in all the private groups and lobbyists give entirely to democrats and register as such. They will be the ones making the decisions and are salivating at this after the infective hand slap given to civil forfeiture reform, the IRS targeting scandal, and a hundred other "oops" scandals that only hurt "deplorable" people. Swat raid over tea grounds in the trash? Small puddle declared wetland? Etc.
Lots of liberals like to constantly repeat their claims that President Trump is telling lies, but repeating something over and over is not evidence.
What I do know is facebook is very far left, and their opinion of what is fake news is anything counter to their wishes.
I said that the "Noble Lie" aspect of Religions is important. Stop inventing statements I never made. If you are not smart enough to understand my premise, ask and learn instead of arguing from ignorance and cherry picking.
Atheistic States have demonstrably more corruption among at all levels and in all aspects of society compared to a Religious society. That corruption is needed for ideologies like communism (and any other deposit authoritarian system) to function.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Galileo in his day would have been deemed fake news because people believed the stars revolved around the earth. Will Facebook remove fake news posts that have no scientific basis, such as those that say childhood vaccines cause autism, organic foods are healthier than non-organic and GMO foods are dangerous and unhealthy? What about misleading and fake new posts comparing solar cell or wind turbine power capacity to fossil fuel and nuclear power plant capacity? Solar and wind can produce power only a few hours a day due to their need for strong sunlight and wind. They produce a third or less of their rated capacity, while fossil and nuclear fuel plants can run 24 hours a day and get very close to their stated power production capacity. If you are an atheist, an article about a miracle is fake news. If you are religious, an article that wonderful things happen by chance is fake news. Fake news is a mantra that really means my candidate did not get elected because unflattering things were said about my candidate by the opponent and that affected the election.
Yes we really want bone stupid vigilantes shooting up eating establishments over fictional conspiracies. Thanks for contributing to the stupidity. Dumbass
No sane person should accept Facebook's highly-questionable judgment about what constitutes "fake news". Zuckerberg has is own axes to grind, and he's trying to put his entire FOOT on the scale, not just his thumb.
The U.S. government is run by moderates on behalf of the feudal elite who, being at least somewhat smarter than you, masquerade as whatever the fuck they need to
I always forget how toxic the slashdot community can get.
"penultimate"
That word does NOT mean what you think it means.
Or you meant to write a sentence that made no sense.
AND... youtube censored it
Civil rules (Hammurabi's code) are older than any known religious rules. But they don't teach you that in Sunday school.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
You shifted right, following the Red Media takeover, and in the process you and your pals allowed fact checking to become a left-wing value. That is why it now appears that newspapers are damn near communist, not because the eveyone else drifted left.
I'm sure this won't hurt CNN and co -too- much.
Facebook and Snopes are functionally the same entity with respect to fact-checking.
Naturally, this bit of truth offended the resident Trigglypuffs here on /.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
What's a journalist? Is that like some sort of antiquated person that still has a LiveJournal?
My understanding of the code is mostly limited to brief internet searches. But, based on the preface of Hammurabi's code it is backed by religion. So, wouldn't it be more accurate to say it's the oldest known set of religious rules?
The problem with those so-called Atheistic States is the despotic authoritarian system, not the lack of religion. Look at North Korea, a modern example that you would call "atheistic", but I would counter that it is an extremely Religious society. That Religion revolves around worshiping the Kim family, and by extension the state that they established.
Kim Jong Il's birth was "heralded by a swallow, caused winter to change to spring, a star to illuminate the sky, and a double rainbow spontaneously appeared". Could have come straight out of any religious text (wasn't someone else's birth heralded by a star?). He could also control the weather with his mood, because what religion is complete without miracles?
It's identical to the "Noble" Lie: elites propagate misinformation to placates the proles, allowing them to further some agenda. The difference is the agenda, not the technique. It matters who is telling the Lie and what they believe is "Noble". When the Saudis stone a rape victim to death and only whip the rapist, they probably believe they are doing the noble thing too.
Belief without evidence and a lack of skepticism are the cause of, not the solution to, authoritarianism.
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
Emperor palpatine is very definately a monarchist.
That had me rolling about laughing, thank you!
Welcome to AltRightDot, you must be new here. Truth or lies do not matter, only shitposting the same thing over and over again until it is willed into our reality.
Still waiting for that citation, shitposter.
end of.
Rubbish. Religion was removed for them to be despotic authoritarians. Read Marx for pity sake, see what happened in the founding of Mao's China, Lenin and Trotsky's Russia (and the continuation under Stalin), Pot's Cambodia, Castro's Cuba, etc.. etc.. etc.. Those are facts backed in history
You then cherry pick a specific "religion" in the DPRK to argue against the validity of actual facts and history with Judea Christian societies. I can't tell if you are really that much of an idiot, or believe your own bullshit.
Sorry, but I refuse to attempt to argue against someone who repeats the same lie and ignores facts. I gave you the ammunition you need to cure ignorance if you choose. As they say, you can lead a horse to water. Here is a hint: Listening to paid for communist speakers like Nye or Kraus does not make you smart. It makes you a moron.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
It doesn't claim to 'come from god', so no.
When it was written, by men, every culture came with an associated religion. Which was on everything, like a gang tag.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
I ignored the ad-hominem in your last comment, but obviously I triggered you somehow since you clearly can't help yourself.
If you're so right and backed up by facts and history as you claim, why resort to insults?
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
Ultimately, there is very little difference between "God chose me to tell you what he said" and "God sent me to rule on his behalf". The rules are still backed by God.
My comment was not simply ad hominem, I pointed you to the facts. The same set of facts several times. Are you apologizing for cherry picking and arguing from ignorance? No, I thought not. It's much easier to claim "victim" instead of "sorry for being wrong and arguing my wrongness". Why resort to the same exact fallacy logic in 3 sequential posts if you are right and I am wrong?
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Rubbish. Religion was removed for them to be despotic authoritarians. Read Marx for pity sake, see what happened in the founding of Mao's China, Lenin and Trotsky's Russia (and the continuation under Stalin), Pot's Cambodia, Castro's Cuba, etc.. etc.. etc.. Those are facts backed in history
Preach on comrade! We should all learn from the example of Islamic states instead, where they embrace and hold strong to their religion! /s
We don't need prayer back in the schools. We need Sharia in the schools! /s
The problem with your idea of "noble lies" is that god knows (pun intended) which parts are which. You cry when the other guy cherrypicks, but the whole "noble lies" thing runs on cherrypicking, where you pick and choose what parts of a religion and its holy books are good to follow.
The very act of calling lies "noble" is itself straight from the despotic authoritarianism playbook. You're basically saying you mean well. Oh yeah Great Leader lies, steals, starves, tortures, and kills by the millions. But he means well. It's all for a good noble cause!
Devine right of kings doesn't make every rule made by the king a 'god given' rule. There is still a difference.
In other terms, the religious don't get to claim all social accomplishments from back in the bad old days when the priests could have anybody killed. Accomplishments were achieved despite the priests.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'