Why Facebook Needs to Take Responsibility for Fake News | Wesley Lowery




Washington Post reporter Wesley Lowery says the social media giant isn’t excused from making responsible editorial choices just because it wishes to see itself …

source

Your reaction?
Cute Cute
0
Cute
Fail Fail
0
Fail
Geeky Geeky
0
Geeky
Lol Lol
0
Lol
Love Love
0
Love
Omg Omg
0
Omg
Win Win
0
Win
Wtf Wtf
0
Wtf

Comments 43

  1. No. Facebook does not create content like other media or journals… We do. If you see something fake report it. That is it. This is power to the people. Anything else is Censorship (and that would be the end of Facebook).

  2. TV and Paper News can't regulate themselfs successfully, much less take responsability for the bullshit they spread, specially with the pseudosciences.

    Do you really think Facebook could do it? Thats a pretty naive and candid thought.

  3. Look at the hipster pretend to sound intellectual. these liberal narcissist are the reason sites like twitter and fb are going under. Sure introduce censorship for your feelings, bully the sites into your agenda then what happens? They go broke. These people are the death mark of platiforms. Rich snobs who went to school to learn how to write a comment. Gtfo.

  4. Oh look – one group of Homo sapiens telling another group of Homo sapiens what IS and IS NOT true.

    Pathetic. That sounds like a psychopathic control system. Oh wait, it IS.

  5. While we are at it, lets make bar owners responsible if they allow guests to spread false news on their premises, or even better, lets ask the NSA to use their capability of screening all emails and phonecalls for falsehoods and censor them. They have this capability, right? So they have a responsibility to keep people from spreading false information. I think individual liberty is way over rated anyway. Lets scrap it.

  6. Are we really surprised that Facebook doesn't care about the garbage on its platform? This is a company that had to admit to investors it was counting 3 second muted offscreen videos as having some kind of value. Oh and most of the videos are taken from Youtube. They don't care.

  7. Too many folks in the comments here are equating facebook filtering out fake news as online censorship. Now, I'm super sensitive about Online censorship myself. What Youtube is trying to do, for example, with "Youtube Heroes" and an army of unpaid volunteer 'flaggers' is an example of a lazy, irresponsible filter program that will result in censorship….but if facebook actually had a paid staff (preferably with journalistic credentials), filtering out the blatantly fake, borderline schizophrenic news and websites that push it, even a small staff of this type would go a very long way, without causing noticeable censorship issues. Ya know, unless you're a nutcase, in which case a large portion of your feed may be affected….but isn't that a good thing that nutcases won't be constantly lured online by fake nonsense?

  8. And who gets to decide what is real or fake when it comes to opinions? This is a bad idea. Just let people figure it out themselves and develop the wisdom to be skeptical about news sources. This would be like holding the store responsible for the information content of the newspapers.

  9. Practically all news is fake news these days. Whose fake news gets to masquerade as news is the debate today. Facebook is not a news organization as much as you may want it to be.

  10. No, The facebooks of the world should not have editorial powers over your content. I do not trust Facebook enough for that. This does not mean that we should not prevent the spreading of false content. These two options are not mutually exclusive.

    Maybe the future lies in a more democratic solution that involves us helping people who have shared liked or agreed with false news and presenting them with the truth.

  11. Facebook is not a reliable source of information, and neither entitled themselves like one. If you want to have an opinion on something its not how much information see is where you see it.

  12. There's an obvious, massive logistical problem with this course of action: Who will be the arbiter of what news is "fake" or not? Would such a policy not pave the way for censorship of legitimate interpretations of current events that powerful, elite interests deem unacceptable?

  13. Fake News for real?
    The only fake news in question here is the fake Mainstream Mass Media News and Information State Propaganda channels that fabricate, misrepresent, twist, and lie about what is really going on regarding foreign and domestic issues by presenting utterly contrived and prescripted fake journalism. I think at least the majority of people not only in the U.S. but internationally as well understand the incredibility of these "mainstream" propaganda channels. It is only fitting that they would "point the proverbial finger" elsewhere for this is what they do so well. The only fakers are the ones who are really faking and making all the nonsensical claims about who is faking as the real fakers speak loudest in accusation. The alternative news and information can totally substantiate their journalism with real facts, the fakers only substantiate their nonsense with official lies in place of the real facts.

  14. The real problem is existance of facebook, whoever uses facebook is complete idiot, and no, i do not care if you have PhD, you are fucking moron.

  15. Haha fake news. Is there some hierarchy that decides what's fake and whats not? What they want people to see and what not? Haha that's literally net censorship. I understand not showing people getting their heads cut off but fake news? Really? Yolo dude. Lets all just play golf and drink beer and chill.

  16. Wesley Lowery

    FB had to get rid of some of its staff because they were accused of practicing censorship not fake news removal. They had an obvious political bias when they were not supposed to be.
    Could you say that the washington post has 100% journalistic integrity ?

  17. Sites like FB should put up a disclaimer on every news item they published along the lines of

    "we are a technology site not a news site therefore there is no editorial policy on the matter of censorship, journalistic integrity and political bias. Therefore all subscribers and readers are recommended to take all they read with "A pinch of salt"…………… and perform your own research to judge credibility of what you read ".

    Won't do their advertising much good though.

    I would add that Big Think should also look at themselves in the way their commenters present themselves( especially the book promoters) and the integrity of their claims.

  18. This guy is a buffoon. If people did want to watch 'fake' news it's their choice. Why should their choices be taken away for biased journalists who as he just stated – selects and filters the news. Let's see all the news unfiltered and let everyone make up their mind from that. Mainstream news is by far the most fake. How many times have we heard people or celebrities saying how the media twisted the truth, or just made up complete bullshit. That's the news that's dangerous and has ruined lives many times over. Fuck Mainstream.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

log in

reset password

Back to
log in