3 ms·

Keep in mind that this allegation is coming from a single conservative curator who no longer works there. And even he seems pretty indecisive about it being an

Keep in mind that this allegation is coming from a single conservative curator who no longer works there. And even he seems pretty indecisive about it being an institutional bias: "I’d come on shift and I’d discover that CPAC or Mitt Romney or Glenn Beck or popular conservative topics wouldn’t be trending because either the curator didn’t recognize the news topic or it was like they had a bias against Ted Cruz." If Facebook is trying to suppress conservative news, they're doing a terrible job of it. I see far more Trump than I would like.

adventured 11y ago
Apparently it's not coming from a single curator. The manipulation of the trending section was much wider spread than that: "Several former Facebook “news curators,” as they were known internally, also told Gizmodo that they were instructed to artificially “inject” selected stories into the trending news module, even if they weren’t popular enough to warrant inclusion—or in some cases weren’t trending at all. The former curators, all of whom worked as contractors, also said they were directed not to include news about Facebook itself in the trending module." The article then mentions a second curator that also admits anti-conservative bias: "Another former curator agreed that the operation had an aversion to right-wing news sources. 'It was absolutely bias. We were doing it subjectively. It just depends on who the curator is and what time of day it is,' said the former curator."
partiallypro 11y ago
> Keep in mind that this allegation is coming from a single conservative curator who no longer works there. This is false, the headline even alludes to it being more than a single source. The entire article uses plural terms and refers to 'several.' I think you read the lede, but skipped the rest.
- djur 11y ago
  From the article: > Other former curators interviewed by Gizmodo denied consciously suppressing conservative news, and we were unable to determine if left-wing news topics or sources were similarly suppressed. The conservative curator described the omissions as a function of his colleagues’ judgements; there is no evidence that Facebook management mandated or was even aware of any political bias at work.

adventured 11y ago

Apparently it's not coming from a single curator. The manipulation of the trending section was much wider spread than that: "Several former Facebook “news curators,” as they were known internally, also told Gizmodo that they were instructed to artificially “inject” selected stories into the trending news module, even if they weren’t popular enough to warrant inclusion—or in some cases weren’t trending at all. The former curators, all of whom worked as contractors, also said they were directed not to include news about Facebook itself in the trending module." The article then mentions a second curator that also admits anti-conservative bias: "Another former curator agreed that the operation had an aversion to right-wing news sources. 'It was absolutely bias. We were doing it subjectively. It just depends on who the curator is and what time of day it is,' said the former curator."

partiallypro 11y ago

> Keep in mind that this allegation is coming from a single conservative curator who no longer works there. This is false, the headline even alludes to it being more than a single source. The entire article uses plural terms and refers to 'several.' I think you read the lede, but skipped the rest.

djur 11y ago
From the article: > Other former curators interviewed by Gizmodo denied consciously suppressing conservative news, and we were unable to determine if left-wing news topics or sources were similarly suppressed. The conservative curator described the omissions as a function of his colleagues’ judgements; there is no evidence that Facebook management mandated or was even aware of any political bias at work.