4 ms·
What is to keep these fact checking organizations free from manipulation & spreading g propaganda? Will Google use this feature to further their own interests a
by dukeluke 10y ago
What is to keep these fact checking organizations free from manipulation & spreading g propaganda? Will Google use this feature to further their own interests alone? If the answer to that is 'no,' how can we be sure they won't?
- croon 10y agoJust publish proof that their fact checking is lying?
- skylan_q 10y agoRumours spread fast. Corrections to rumours don't fully negate the rumours. Journalists are also held less accountable than even elected officials these days.
- croon 10y agoWait, are you arguing for or against fact checking?
- skylan_q 10y agoI'm for it. I'm saying that it doesn't really solve the problem of lies in mass media and the impact of the lies. It's a mitigating factor at best, a polarizer at worst.
- croon 10y agoSure, but the cost of free press is that basically anyone can publish whatever crap they want. Fact checking is a good tool (critical thinking and self-verification would be better). What can save time over time is to know which publications continously publish the most verifiable truths. Albeit always reading with vigilance. In what way would fact checking be polarizing?
- skylan_q 10y agoFact checking is a good tool (critical thinking and self-verification would be better). Humans don't act this way and don't respond to it. The media isn't out to inform people through content, but to program people through delivery. The only result of this will be to have people say "SEE! GOOGLE SAYS IT'S TRUE/FAKE!" And they'll share the headline on Facebook/Twitter and be done with it. People don't act rationally anymore, especially when it comes to media. Media outlets have agendas. The press hasn't been free in a long time. https://medium.com/@SarahRRunge/amazon-the-washington-post-and-the-cia-d68a4ee802e#.f389arnut https://medium.com/@SarahRRunge/amazon-the-washington-post-a...
- dingo_bat 10y agoWhich can get censored by the same algorithms.
- croon 10y agoThrough that outlet, theoretically, sure. Wouldn't stop it though.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- bnolsen 10y agoConsidering the fake news movement is itself in large part propaganda google has chosen sides in this already and absolutely shouldn't be trusted.
- andybak 10y agoSorry. You'll have to explain yourself in a bit more depth. At first reading that sounds like confused nonsense which I'm sure doesn't give your argument the merit it deserves.
- curt15 10y agoPizzagate is a pretty classic example of "fake news". How is criticism of it in any way "propaganda"?
- rfrank 10y agoThere's been over 1500 pedophilia and sex trafficking arrests since Trump took office. It may be less fake than you think.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- andybak 10y agoSadly the answer to this and many similar questions about society, politics and power is and always will be "we can't be sure". Eternal vigilance and a dedication to the open society and Enlightenment values are the best we can do.
- mattchew 10y agoWe can't be sure, and they won't always be perfectly honest, but if you're billing yourself as a fact checker, you're trying to appeal to people who are interested in the truth in the first place. You can apply some spin and get away with it (and this will happen) but if you tell flat out lies, people will notice. This isn't a panacea, but it is a step in the right direction.
- hueving 10y agoYou can significantly lie in your narrative by choosing what to fact check.