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."
Just because every utterance from the White House turns out to be a lie, doesn't make fact-checkers "leftist", it just makes the orange Hitler a lying piece of shit.
'Do you find that most people are "leftists"?'
Compared to him, most people are.
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.
This.
President Trump’s 492 false or misleading claims in his first 100 days ...
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Since the people vetting the ads are almost all leftists, it'd be easy for them to decree something as non-fact.
It seems that many people on Slashdot have been afflicted with outrage blindness when they read something upsetting because they never seem to read the part that would otherwise defuse their outrage.
These aren't supposed to be stories that are disputed for reasons of opinion or partisanship, but rather outright hoaxes and lies.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
You know, you fools that keep comparing Trump to Hitler or the "right" to nazi's have no fucking clue what the hell you are are talking about. You are comparing the US government and its president to a system and man that murdered 12 million jews, homosexuals, and other people he found undesirable in most efficient process he could come up with. A man that started a world war that killed over 50 million people.
When your trump derangement syndrome has you frothing at the mouth and pulling bullshit out of your ass like this, then you are one sorry excuse for a human. Go talk to someone that survived one of the real Nazi death camps and compare Trump to Hitler and see what they tell you.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
The difference between CNN and fake news is that CNN publishes retractions and corrections.
Fake news isn't about bias, it's about fabricating stories entirely with the intent to mislead and continuing those lies even after they have been exposed. Just being less than perfect doesn't count, and if you think it does then literally all news is fake.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
You know, you fools that keep comparing Trump to Hitler or the "right" to nazi's have no fucking clue what the hell you are are talking about.
No. Listen carefully.
We are not comparing Trump to Hitler, we are pointing out that there are literal, actual Nazis involved in his administration and in his electoral campaign. And many others who are not literal Nazis, but have supported Nazis or nationalists, or are nationalists, or are just generally awful people.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Well, the definition of "alt-right" is evidently "anybody who didn't vote for Hillary".
Wrong, quoting Wikipedia:
"The alt-right, or alternative right, is a loosely defined group of people with far-right ideologies who reject mainstream conservatism in favor of white nationalism. White supremacist[1] Richard Spencer initially promoted the term in 2010 in reference to a movement centered on white nationalism, and did so according to the Associated Press to disguise overt racism, white supremacism, and neo-Nazism."
Alt-right was a term invented by racists to hide the fact they're racist. It's little wonder that alt-right has become a byword for racism and other forms of bigotry used by the far-right.
Trying to change the definition of terms is a tactic favoured by extremists in an attempt to disguise what is ultimately a very distasteful philosophy to most people. The only people who think that Alt-Right refers to anyone who "didn't vote for hillary" are people who are extremely deluded. Also adding to your delusion is the idea that 3/4 voters voted for Trump... when it was Hillary that won the popular vote.
Your kind of revisionism is exactly why normal people, whether they be conservative or liberal, detest the alt-right. You're attempting to outright lie to us, then telling us anyone contradicting you is oppressing you. There's not point in getting upset that no-one outside your echo chamber is buying your absurdities.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.