First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next  Last
FaKebook to judge what is real news.
35343 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 12/15/16

Xxanthar wrote:
Yeah. We need people like you guys deciding what's fake and what's real for us. lol


You certainly haven't had much luck doing it by yourself so far. >.>

Posted 12/15/16
I'm just voicing my displeasure at an unelected group of people being given a choke hold on the news millions of people read. I don't use fakebook, but I thought other people should be made aware that they have someone determining what news is most important for them to see, and more importantly, what is not for you to see. I can't help if you don't see a problem with this kind of thing, but many people do.
10998 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Winnipeg, MB.
Online
Posted 12/15/16

Xxanthar wrote:

I'm just voicing my displeasure at an unelected group of people being given a choke hold on the news millions of people read. I don't use fakebook, but I thought other people should be made aware that they have someone determining what news is most important for them to see, and more importantly, what is not for you to see. I can't help if you don't see a problem with this kind of thing, but many people do.



"We'll use the reports from our community, along with other signals, to send stories to these organizations," Facebook VP Adam Mosseri said in a blog post Thursday. "If the fact checking organizations identify a story as fake, it will get flagged as disputed and there will be a link to the corresponding article explaining why."

Facebook is making it clear that users will still be able to post whatever they want, no matter how bogus, on their own Facebook pages. But "you will see a warning that the story has been disputed as you share," Mosseri said.


They aren't "determining what news is most important to see and what you can't see" they're separating the legitimate from the fabrication by way of labels (without hiding any news stories) and even show you the way they came to their conclusions so you can make an informed decision for yourself. It's not censorship, it's not a chokehold, it's just additional information.
37072 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 12/15/16

Xxanthar wrote:

Unlike liberals, conservatives do not have the media answering to the head of their party. They didn't get to approve stories in advance from the various news sources like the democrats did. They didn't have the media to mail them the questions to a debate in advance. Conservative news sites don't make up their military documents like Ran Rather, or editing a documentary to provide falsify quotes and twist perceptions like Katie Couric, or lying basically EVERYTHING like Brian Williams. No but we'll sure count on you guys to fix 'fake news' for us. Yeeeeaaaa....No.

Hopefully President trump will deal with the REAL 'fake news' when he is in office.


FOX News has a revolving door where Republican politicians move back and forth between holding office, serving as industrial lobbyists, and serving as pundits with their own television shows. Rupert Murdoch is known to view his media empire as a political tool. FOX has been caught lying about "no go zones" in the UK and France, and if you want an example of someone in the right wing media making things up as he goes for a living look no further than Alex "Black Helicopters, Hobbit Homes, and FEMA Camps" Jones or Sean Hannity, who surgically attached his lips to Trump's sphincter and proudly claimed that Trump took advice from him. Hell, the top dog at Breitbart went on to be Trump's campaign advisor and is currently a part of his fucking administration.

Oh, and this?


Hopefully President trump will deal with the REAL 'fake news' when he is in office.


It undermines all of your faux outrage. All of it.
Posted 12/15/16

octorockandroll wrote:


They aren't "determining what news is most important to see and what you can't see" they're separating the legitimate from the fabrication by way of labels (without hiding any news stories) and even show you the way they came to their conclusions so you can make an informed decision for yourself. It's not censorship, it's not a chokehold, it's just additional information.


Who are 'They' to do this for us, uninvited? I'm just shocked that you can't see the danger of letting a group of elites edit news stories with their opinions, or altering trending positions, and deciding what needs fact checking and what does not. After all of the media manipulation we read about in the DNC's hacked emails, It's well within reason to suspect the motives of companies such as facebook and any special news police that they appoint.
Posted 12/15/16
Facebook is a joke i just use it for my gaming most the stories there are biased. I can due my own fact checking!
Posted 12/15/16 , edited 12/15/16

BlueOni wrote:

FOX News has a revolving door where Republican politicians move back and forth between holding office, serving as industrial lobbyists, and serving as pundits with their own television shows. Rupert Murdoch is known to view his media empire as a political tool. FOX has been caught lying about "no go zones" in the UK and France, and if you want an example of someone in the right wing media making things up as he goes for a living look no further than Alex "Black Helicopters, Hobbit Homes, and FEMA Camps" Jones or Sean Hannity, who surgically attached his lips to Trump's sphincter and proudly claimed that Trump took advice from him. Hell, the top dog at Breitbart went on to be Trump's campaign advisor and is currently a part of his fucking administration.

Oh, and this?


Hopefully President trump will deal with the REAL 'fake news' when he is in office.


It undermines all of your faux outrage. All of it.


Bologna, We are talking about facebook and it's attempt to manipulate and censor news for millions. I am not interested in your attempts to de-rail the topic with your wacky faux news, alex jones, Rupert Murdoch, Abe Lincoln, boogie man of the day shtick. I do hope President Trump will fix this type of censorship. I hope the left gets what they deserve for all of their illegal actions over the past 8 years. I realize nothing will happen, but I can't hope.
10998 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Winnipeg, MB.
Online
Posted 12/15/16 , edited 12/15/16

Xxanthar wrote:


octorockandroll wrote:


They aren't "determining what news is most important to see and what you can't see" they're separating the legitimate from the fabrication by way of labels (without hiding any news stories) and even show you the way they came to their conclusions so you can make an informed decision for yourself. It's not censorship, it's not a chokehold, it's just additional information.


Who are 'They' to do this for us, uninvited? I'm just shocked that you can't see the danger of letting a group of elites edit news stories with their opinions, or altering trending positions, and deciding what needs fact checking and what does not. After all of the media manipulation we read about in the DNC's hacked emails, It's well within reason to suspect the motives of companies such as facebook and any special news police that they appoint.


Uninvited?! How the hell is this uninvited? People have been asking Facebook to stop spreading bullshit like the Pizzagate crapshow for a long time now. In fact I haven't heard a single Facebook user be against this yet. The only one who's really vocal about not liking it is you, and you not only do not use Facebook, but are clearly very misinformed about the situation.

For instance "edit news stories with their opinions" ?? Huh? Nobody is editing news stories. Where are you getting this from? In fact the very same quote I was referring to specifically said they weren't going to do that or edit trending positions. Did you just not read that entire thing?

Likewise, they are not "deciding what needs fact checking and what does not" you do. It is entirely up to Facebook users to report things as fake news. Once reported, the fact checking occurs and if it is proven false nothing happens to the story except it gets labeled as such and is allowed to remain with the caveat that facebook links to an article giving the reasons as to why it is determined to be fake. This too was shown to you in my last post, why don't you get it?

Again, if you have ANY evidence to back up your accusations of the IFCN please show it. All evidence points to them being unbiased, non-partisan and fair. How is this not exactly what you want? An unbiased party, one that has a firmly established track record of being unbiased, that watches over stories on facebook and separates news stories on the platform based on whether or not they are factually correct sounds like the perfect counter to all the "manipulating" that you complain about. How else would you fix it? I really want to know what you would do to ensure a fair environment that deals with the fake news you hate so much free of political bias. Tell me what you would do if not this.
152 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / M
Offline
Posted 12/15/16
just go read breitbart, then. you don't HAVE to get news from facebook, and you shouldn't.
Posted 12/15/16

octorockandroll wrote:

Again, if you have ANY evidence to back up your accusations of the IFCN please show it. All evidence points to them being unbiased, non-partisan and fair. How is this not exactly what you want? An unbiased party that watches over stories on facebook and separates news stories on the platform based on whether or not they are factually correct sounds like the perfect counter to all the "manipulating" that you complain about. How else would you fix it? I really want to know what you would do to ensure a fair environment that deals with the fake news you hate so much free of political bias. Tell me what you would do if not this.


Again I cite the DNC's manipulation of, and collusion with, the media as demonstrated with many of the emails that were hacked, including questions to a presidential debate, and reporters asking the DNC permission before they ran stories. That's the only proof that I need that democrats have way too much control over the media as it is, and we don't need them deciding what's real and fake.
37072 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 12/15/16 , edited 12/15/16

Xxanthar wrote:

Bologna, We are talking about facebook and it's attempt to manipulate and censor news for millions. I am not interested in your attempts to de-rail the topic with your wacky faux news, alex jones, Rupert Murdoch, Abe Lincoln, boogie man of the day shtick. I do hope President Trump will fix this type of censorship. I hope the left gets what they deserve for all of their illegal actions over the past 8 years. I realize nothing will happen, but I can't hope.


I responded directly to points you made in a post in your own thread, so unless you're derailing then neither of us are. Also, the point of that last bit is that your argument about Trump engaging in state censorship of media outlets you don't like in the name of disadvantaging your political opponents completely undermines the premise this thread was started on. You've got double standards about authoritarianism; it's fine when it serves you and terrible when it hurts you.
10998 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Winnipeg, MB.
Online
Posted 12/15/16 , edited 12/15/16

Xxanthar wrote:


octorockandroll wrote:

Again, if you have ANY evidence to back up your accusations of the IFCN please show it. All evidence points to them being unbiased, non-partisan and fair. How is this not exactly what you want? An unbiased party that watches over stories on facebook and separates news stories on the platform based on whether or not they are factually correct sounds like the perfect counter to all the "manipulating" that you complain about. How else would you fix it? I really want to know what you would do to ensure a fair environment that deals with the fake news you hate so much free of political bias. Tell me what you would do if not this.


Again I cite the DNC's manipulation of, and collusion with, the media as demonstrated with many of the emails that were hacked, including questions to a presidential debate, and reporters asking the DNC permission before they ran stories. That's the only proof that I need that democrats have way too much control over the media as it is, and we don't need them deciding what's real and fake.


They aren't. It is not the DNC, it is an unbiased third party, one you have no incriminating evidence against, that will be labelling the disputed news on facebook as such and showing the evidence they used to come to their conclusion. They do not "decide what's real and what's fake", they give you the tools to decide for yourself whether or not a story is fake. Again, what would you have them do if not this? You have a problem with fake news just like them so tell me what you would do in their shoes that woud be better than this.
Posted 12/15/16

BlueOni wrote:


Xxanthar wrote:

Bologna, We are talking about facebook and it's attempt to manipulate and censor news for millions. I am not interested in your attempts to de-rail the topic with your wacky faux news, alex jones, Rupert Murdoch, Abe Lincoln, boogie man of the day shtick. I do hope President Trump will fix this type of censorship. I hope the left gets what they deserve for all of their illegal actions over the past 8 years. I realize nothing will happen, but I can't hope.


I responded directly to points you made in a post in your own thread, so unless you're derailing then neither of us are. Also, the point of that last bit is that your argument about Trump engaging in state censorship of media outlets you don't like in the name of disadvantaging your political opponents completely undermines the premise this thread was started on. You've got double standards about authoritarianism; it's fine when it serves you and terrible when it hurts you.


You are putting words into my mouth. I never said anything about state censorship. I said maybe he would fix the obvious problems with the media, like bias and censorship by google/facebook/twitter. If I had brought state censorship, I surely would have mentioned that last 8 years of state censorship under the Obama administration.
Posted 12/15/16 , edited 12/15/16

octorockandroll wrote:


They aren't. It is an unbiased third party, one you have no incriminating evidence against, that will be labelling the disputed news on facebook as such and showing the evidence they used to come to their conclusion. They do not "decide what's real and what's fake", they give you the tools to decide for yourself whether or not a story is fake. Again, what would you have them do if not this? You have a problem with fake news just like them so tell me what you would do in their shoes that woud be better than this.


Unbiased just like the news media? I don't trust facebook's pick to Police the news, sorry.
It's kinda like how you don't trust trump's cabinet picks
37072 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 12/15/16

Xxanthar wrote:

You are putting words into my mouth. I never said anything about state censorship. I said maybe he would fix the obvious problems with the media, like bias and censorship by google/facebook/twitter. If I had brought state censorship, I surely would have mentioned that last 8 years of state censorship under the Obama administration.


So Donald Trump's call for establishing far-reaching, loosely written federal libel legislation for the express purpose of making it easier for subjects of reporting to win lawsuits against outlets that present information the subject considers unfair or untrue isn't essentially an avenue for politicians (particularly Trump) to engage in state censorship? Or didn't you know that's what he's proposed on the campaign trail? Didn't you know that Donald Trump has a personal history of using libel suits to attempt to silence critique, to the point that he threatened The Onion with a lawsuit for posting a satirical article about him and that he did sue Bill Maher for telling a joke about him?
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.