Americans Don't Think the Platforms Are Doing Enough To Fight Fake News (poynter.org)

Journalists regularly weigh in on what platforms like Facebook and Google are and aren't doing to stop the spread of viral misinformation. But what do Americans at large think? From a report: Nothing good, according to a new survey published by Gallup and the Knight Foundation on Wednesday. The report, based on web surveys from a random sample of 1,203 U.S. adults, found that 85 percent of Americans don't think the platforms are doing enough to stop the spread of fake news. Additionally, 88 percent want tech companies to be transparent about how they surface content, while 79 percent think those companies should be regulated like other media organizations -- a common trope among journalists. That's despite the fact that the majority of people surveyed (54 percent) said social media platforms help keep them informed and that they're concerned about those companies making editorial judgments.

Comments

"Fake news" or "Opinions I disagree with?"

[wiggles]

I think we haven't done enough to separate these two concepts. We're confusing manipulative lies with opinions incompatible with the worldview of a segment of the population, and it will destroy us.

Re:"Fake news" or "Opinions I disagree with?"

[Anonymous Coward]

The title is too long. It should be "Americans don't think". That is enough and informative.

Re:"Fake news" or "Opinions I disagree with?"

[Only Time Will Tell]

I think we haven't done enough to separate these two concepts. We're confusing manipulative lies with opinions incompatible with the worldview of a segment of the population, and it will destroy us.

To a certain point, I agree, however, I think there's been a significant rise of opinion pieces that are passed off as 'news'. I also find opinions laced into articles either through manipulative language or statements not backed by facts (and refuted by other news media articles) on a greater frequency than before. I think media outlets need to clearly label what is opinion versus news (and the best outlets do) and keep high editorial standards around slipping in influential language. The other best way to combat it is to have a heterogenous news diet, being sure to read articles from multiple sources that might be labeled left and right of center (you can avoid the far left or right ones altogether).

Re:"Fake news" or "Opinions I disagree with?"

[gman003]

The mixing of the two concepts is a deliberate ploy on the part of those telling manipulative lies. They're trying to reframe it from "truth vs lies" to "freedom of speech".

Re:"Fake news" or "Opinions I disagree with?"

[Joce640k]

Even better would be if people learned to think for themselves and/or check up on stories before reposting them.

Trying to pass laws to regulate the news feeds to prevent "fake news" is putting the cart before the horse.

Re:"Fake news" or "Opinions I disagree with?"

[swb]

Part of the problem is we used to largely achieve this separation (imperfectly, of course) by paying intelligent adults reasonable salaries to do things like verify sources, check facts, and more or less make the news more reasonable. I believe this once somewhat honorable profession was called "journalism". It had its flaws (Hearst, et al) but by and large it worked.

Now that journalism has collapsed or been sucked into "the infotainment content business" nobody's willing to pay for that or they expect an algorithm that can automate the cost of doing down to zero.

It's also complicated somewhat by the increase in diversity. Part of the effectiveness (and flaw) of journalism was that, yes, some of what made it through the journalism filters was "fake news" but it was more or less fake news built off of shared assumptions and biases of a more homogeneous population.

Now that we have fewer shared assumptions and biases, it's getting more and more difficult even to decide on what's "fake news" unless the fakeness can be determined by physical science and mathematics.

My money is on all of this getting worse before it gets better.

propaganda

[Bodhammer]

propaganda
noun propaganda \ prä-p-gan-d , pr- \

1) : the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person
2) : ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause; also : a public action having such an effect


“That the existential realm of man could be taken over by pseudorealities whose fictitious nature threatens to become indiscernible is truly a depressing thought. And yet, the Platonic nightmare, I hold, possesses an alarming contemporary relevance. For the general public is being reduced to a state where people are not only unable to find out about the truth but also become unable even to search for the truth because they are satisfied with deception and trickery that have determined their convictions, satisfied with a fictitious reality created by design through the abuse of language.”

--Josef Pieper

Which fake news?

[SuperKendall]

You can't really win when 50% of the population considers one news fake, and the other 50% considers the opposite news to be fake...

Maybe just let people read different news sources and decide.

Re:Which fake news?

[Solandri]

It's more like 25% of the population considers one news fake, another 25% considers the opposite news to be fake. Those of us in the middle 50% find all the shenanigans by those on the two extremes to be exasperating, and would be happy to see both their conspiracy theories banned as fake.

Re:Which fake news?

[houstonbofh]

It's more like 25% of the population considers one news fake, another 25% considers the opposite news to be fake. Those of us in the middle 50% find all the shenanigans by those on the two extremes to be exasperating, and would be happy to see both their conspiracy theories banned as fake.

I think you have it almost right... 25% consider their "fake news" true. Another 25% consider their "fake news" true. And 50% consider it all fake to some degree or more, and do not want to be around either side with blinders on.

a tad self-serving

[ooloorie]

Nothing good, according to a new survey published by Gallup and the Knight Foundation on Wednesday. The report, based on web surveys from a random sample of 1,203 U.S. adults, found that 85 percent of Americans don't think the platforms are doing enough to stop the spread of fake news

So the people with a vested interest in propping up traditional media and censorship miraculously discover in a poll that... Americans want more censorship!

It's like Stalin proclaiming that Russians want more communism!

Or like Brawndo proclaiming that Brawndo is what people crave!

You want to fight fake news?

[Lucas123]

Howabout teaching critical thinking skills at every grade level. A large chunk of this generation may already be too far gone, but that doesn't mean we can't begin fixing the problem with the next one. Anyone with even a modest ability to critically think when confronted with hyperbole on social media sites can quickly discern real from fake news, or at least realize the need to use Google or other search engines (such as duckduckgo.com) to check the veracity of any "news" report or bombastic claim.

What is fake news

[Dorianny]

The problem is that the definition of "fake news" seems to have changed for incorrect facts or biased viewpoints to "anything that contradicts my beliefs or I simply don't like"

Re:Getting news ...

[Wycliffe]

Getting news served up inside a bubble is a goddam mistake.

Exactly. The whole concept of "likes" and recommendations based on passed viewing habits is a disaster. Netflix, facebook, youtube, even public education is moving to "personalized content". Personalized content doesn't create a well rounded person, personalized content turns a slightly one sided person into a completely one sided person over a very short amount of time. Silicon Valley needs to completely abandon most forms of personalized content but I predict instead they will likely double down and instead start using a person's friends list to decide what is and is not fake news.

That comes off like a cop-out

[rsilvergun]

there's plenty of actual fake news going around. Google "QAnon". There's also a ton of misinformation around Climate Change. And then there's John Oliver's video on Astroturfing last week.

There's literally billions being spent to spread what can only be called lies. I'm less worried about folks confusing opinions with facts and more worried about them confusing outright lies for something true. That's what's going to destroy us.