Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Pinterest Cracks Down on Anti-Vaxxers, Pressuring Facebook To Follow (cnbc.com)

Posted by msmash on from the taking-a-stand dept.

Social network Pinterest has taken a big step to stop the spread of false content that is damaging people's health, which could put pressure on competitors to follow. From a report: Pinterest said Wednesday that it would no longer return any search results, including pins and boards, for terms related to vaccinations, whether in favor or against them. It took that step in late 2018 after noticing that the majority of shared images on Pinterest cautioned people against vaccinations, despite medical guidelines demonstrating that most vaccines are safe for most people. Pinterest told CNBC on Wednesday that it's been hard to remove this anti-vaccination content entirely, so it put the ban in place until it can figure out a more permanent strategy. It's working with health experts including doctors, as well as the social media analysis company called Storyful to come up with a better solution, the company said.

4 of 312 comments (clear)

  1. Will it help? by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 3, Interesting

    People aren't going on Pintrest to search for vaccines to learn and make a reasoned argument. The problem is they find it organically and get sucked in.

    If people wanted to search for information, they would use Google.

    --
    Your ad here. Ask me how!
    1. Re:Will it help? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      This is how society loses its freedom of speech. Sure it's just pintrest and possibly facebook; but what if google decided to weigh in with their opinon on the matter?

      The slippery slope might be a fallacious argument, but it's not always wrong.

      The only ways to preserve freedom of speech are through anonymity (if desired) and the right to say whatever you want (aside from direct threats or calls to violence). Allowing a few companies to essentially serve as gatekeepers to the internet is risky and foolish.

      Censoring speech on a private platform is nowhere close to being equal to censoring someone's right to free speech. You can shot as loud as you want on the street, just not while standing within my building that I paid to construct on the land that I own. Nuances are important to appreciate.

    2. Re:Will it help? by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm done trying to keep people alive. There's about 8 billion humans now. That's plenty.

      You know why there are no 80+ year old anti-vaxers? Because they remember what an iron lung is. My grandma allegedly slapped a doctor because when I was born they stopped vaccinations for smallpox in our area and she was adamant that I HAVE TO get that vaccination. She lost a brother that way when she was a child.

      I guess people have to lose loved ones again to be reminded that there's a reason for this.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  2. Re:Thanks Pinterest. Trying to do good by doing ba by GregMmm · · Score: 1, Interesting

    SirSlud, thank you for your comment. Again, who decides what is "dangerous" information? People lie all the time, it's life. People shout down the opposing side by calling others names and labeling them with incorrect labels. Really what needs to happen is simply have a conversation. But this is a personal thing.

    Stupid information? Again says who? From what point of view?

    Thankfully, I'm not utterly ignorant of history, I fall between somewhat, and so-so.