November 20, 2016
Until corporate media and the neoliberal establishment … threw a temper-tantrum about misinformation on social media to scapegoat blame (for the election results), Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg balked at the notion faulty reports circulating on social media had anything at all to do with the November 8th shocker.
“Of all the content on Facebook, more than 99 percent of what people see is authentic. Only a very small amount is fake news and hoaxes,” Zuckerberg wrote in a post to his platform last Saturday. …
Now, rather than stand by that original assertion, Zuckerberg instead cast all logic aside and unleashed a Machiavellian seven-point plan to eradicate the “very small amount” of false information (that oh so insignificant less than 1% of all Facebook content) apparently forgetting what he posted exactly one week ago. …
- Stronger detection. The most important thing we can do is improve our ability to classify misinformation. This means better technical systems to detect what people will flag as false before they do it themselves.
- Easy reporting. Making it much easier for people to report stories as fake will help us catch more misinformation faster.
- Third party verification. There are many respected fact checking organizations and, while we have reached out to some, we plan to learn from many more.
- Warnings. We are exploring labeling stories that have been flagged as false by third parties or our community, and showing warnings when people read or share them.
- Related articles quality. We are raising the bar for stories that appear in related articles under links in News Feed.
- Disrupting fake news economics. A lot of misinformation is driven by financially motivated spam. We’re looking into disrupting the economics with ads policies like the one we announced earlier this week, and better ad farm detection.
- Listening. We will continue to work with journalists and others in the news industry to get their input, in particular, to better understand their fact checking systems and learn from them.
… Facebook still does not provide the means to rebut post and link removals or the sudden unpublishing of pages … . This has already imperiled owners of perfectly legitimate pages with millions of fans to the arduous process of challenging unjustified reports and coping in the meantime with devastating loss of revenue. …
It all sounds almost okay if you can agree in principle to having your information (and therefore your thoughts and opinions) managed by a central authority. But – setting aside the question of whether you can trust Facebook – can you trust a central authority? Can’t and wouldn’t a central authority be co-opted by special interests? Of course it would.
See Also Weaponizing Social Media