What do you consider satire in the Conservative circles? Those three you mentioned exagerates news to prove a desired point. Are those notorious headlines from Breitbart circulating around the net the Right's version of "the lulz"? The media does self censor a lot of news that makes their corporate parent or even the government look bad (Pentagon paying "experts" to promote the war on cable news). There are events that look bad for the establishment that aren't reported (wikileaks). With the marriage of left-leaning publications being bought out by large media corporations, that line has blurred. That said, I don't think charges of MSM censorship allows deliberately false headlines that can be easily fact checked to be inserted into news feeds. It just means I'd look for a sustainable answer towards the ideals of journalism, an informed public that leads towards engagement with the subject being reported on. I thought reason, heritage, or other rightist publications help solve that, but maybe those sites too were bought out by the donor elite.
Who said anything about deliberately false headlines by the mainstream media?? They may do that sometimes but it is rare. What they do is sit on news that make the left look bad and run full steam ahead with stories that make the right look bad. Their bias shows with the stories they run and those they censor or give very little lip service to. The bias shows through clearly if you open your eyes.
I thought that's the point of the Fox News Network. If you're not using that as reason to defend fake news being posted on social media, then my bad...I misunderstood.
I rarely watch Fox news so I can't tell you what they do all the time but when I did watch them, I saw a lot of criticism toward both candidates in the actual news (The actual news does not include opinion shows like Hannity and OReilly). The liberal mainstream media rarely covered Hillary's many scandals like hte emails, Benghazi, etc... like they deserved to be covered. They also pushed a false narrative with Trump painting him as a racist. The mainstream medias bias came shining through in news stories while Fox's bias was mainly seen in shows that are designed to be opinionated and not in the actual news.
I don't watch cable news, but I have to reevaluate some of the news I read. The in-depth articles to the scandals you mentioned are there and are covered in the major publications, it's just hidden and "retweeted less". As for the narrative on Trump, this is why I like hearing opinionated, yet preachy fake news reporter John Stewart speak. Skipped to 3:14-5:00. I guess if I could ever watch an Alex Jones podcast without vomiting, I could probably see some equivalence between him and a show like Stewart's (was) and Oliver's
My question is why do you think it's wrong for Facebook to be picky with sponsored content which is fake but other media outlets screen sponsored content and no one makes a fuss about it at all? Why does FB have to have a higher standard?
It's pretty funny how people conveniently forget how to think these days. " And just WHO is going to determine what's FAKE and what isn't?" It's really not that hard. If I start a thread saying that DMo has signed with the Rockets, is it really that hard to know if it's true or not? And is it really censorship if Clutch decides to shut a thread like that down? WTF has happened to people lately where this is actually a difficult concept to understand?
I agree it's misleading -- but shortening it may have been because of the Twitter character limit? The part quoted is also the direct answer to the question posed. And: "I'm not going to rule out anything, but we're not going to do X" is a contradiction, isn't it? That could be interpreted as: [1] "We're not going to do X, but otherwise I'm not going to rule out anything." or [2] "I'm not going to rule out anything, but we don't plan on doing X." If the latter then the more relevant part of that response is the first part. He should have just answered, straightforwardly, "We're not going to do X" if indeed his answer to the posed question is that it it will be ruled out as an option.
A nice article on the ethical and technical challenges of dealing appropriately with "fake news" on Facebook. https://techcrunch.com/2016/11/19/zuckerberg-reveals-plans-to-address-misinformation-on-facebook/ Here's an excerpt:
Fake sensentionalized hoax conspiracy clickbait "news" based on mistruth and all out false information is what this new "fake news" phenomenon is all about. Duping tens of thousands to believe and share the false info Like how people believed the KKK endorsed Clinton this election season based on some guy's trolling, and the alt right running with it, and the uneducated masses eating it up as fact
You would think but nope. I think Flynn (retired general that is now Trump national security advisor) tweeted articles that Clinton was involved in sex crimes. Complete fabrication and yet he believed it. I'm sure many followers of Trump did too. Now if you can believe something outrageous like that, it's easy to see how less obvious completely fabricated stories can spread and people will believe them. There isn't a need to said what's fake. That's hard to do. Maybe one approach is just state what's verified as not fake or even fake if you are absolutely sure. Everything can default to unverified as either. But once something has been flagged, all link to it get the updated status. That's a value-add private company can provide.
Stuff like that is incredibly easy to verify. A lot of news are not so easy matters of fact. It's like this, ask a Rockets fan how a losing game versus the Jazz went then ask a Jazz fan how it went.
Right abandon the right of private company to do whatever they want. Cool bean. Right admitted they need fake news. Extra cool. Of course there is no left and right here. There is only the question of if fake news should be handled in some way given how much of it happened. And there isn't an easy answer. But I'm sure it will happen. These huge social platform certainly have the technological capabilities to some degree warn user of fake news.
