8 ms·

"Fake news" appears to be "news I don't like" and has no correlation with the accuracy of the content. Conveniently, Facebook seems to agree with many major med

"Fake news" appears to be "news I don't like" and has no correlation with the accuracy of the content. Conveniently, Facebook seems to agree with many major media outlets about what news they don't like, so they can present their arbitrary definition of "fake" as objective and conveniently no one can break through the bubble to prove otherwise.

Retric 9y ago
Some groups flat out make up news stories to fit some narrative. What else are you going to call that than 'fake news'? 'Candidate X comes out as gay.' 'Secret photos reveal candidate X at KKK lynching.' Are both rather over the top, but also the kind of lies that influence elections.
- menacingly 9y ago
  If you don't like that, you're going to hate the physical realm, where anyone can make any claim and you're left with nothing but your wits to discern the truth
  - uep 9y ago
    > If you don't like that, you're going to hate the physical realm, where anyone can make any claim and you're left with nothing but your wits to discern the truth So you're saying that we should let these organizations lie as much as they want, because people lie in your day-to-day life? The people you meet in your day-to-day life and lie to your face are much more limited in the number of people they can influence with lies. Why shouldn't we make enormously more powerful institutions more accountable for lies?
  - ebola1717 9y ago
    This misunderstands the way technology, social media in particular, have exacerbated problems with misinformation. No one is claiming the media was perfect before. Obviously hoaxes and false rumors have always been a thing. But social media has made disinformation scalable.
    - menacingly 9y ago
      Speed and scale of speech do not impact whether or not it's got an equal seat at the table. It just means you're cool with any expression as long as it's not threatening. Which there's nothing special about, it's how basically everyone is by default. There's no principle there.
      - Retric 9y ago
        Propaganda is used because it works and scale ends up changing type. Consider the difference from 1 dead cell vs 1 million dead cells at the tip of your finger vs 1 billion dead cells in your arm.
        menacingly 9y ago
        but look at how you're framing it. the undesirable speech isn't a disease the body has, it's a part of the body. we are the collective, even the gross parts. if we want to change what we don't like, we do it with competing ideas, not by cutting them off
        Retric 9y ago
        These are not competing ideas, they are just lies. I have no problem with the Weekly World News being on a fiction shelf, but we have libel laws for a reason. The truth does not have a sign outside saying 'This is true' and lies repeated often enough get a following. PS: There is a huge difference between blowing things that actually happened out of proportion to support an argument and saying anything that someone might believe.
        chrisco255 9y ago
        So what is the definition of "fake news"?
    - chrisco255 9y ago
      For as long as I can remember, National Enquirer and other magazines like that adorned the racks of every grocery store and book store I've ever been to. Yellow journalism was coined as a term over 100 years ago. There's nothing new about "fake news". And it has been scalable since the invention of the printing press.
- dsfyu404ed 9y ago
  You can find the same crap with slightly better spell checking by the checkout isles in the grocery store. This isn't new.
  - graphitezepp 9y ago
    I find it actually kinda worrying that many seem to have a perception that making up news is a new thing. The only thing that has changed is the volume of information, people in control of news sources have been lying since time immemorial.
    - sqeaky 9y ago
      People believing in such vast quantities does seem to be new. I don't know anyone who believed the non-sense in the National Enquirer, but I do know a few people who buy because they think it is funny. People, whole communities of people believe, non-sense today. Not small groups like Flat-earthers or chemtrail theorists who number in the hundreds or thousands (per their website/forums sign-ups). There will always be some people on the fringe. We avoided truly ridiculous ideas for decades. Things like "911 was an inside job" or "Obama was born in Kenya" are believed by tens of millions of people. This is a new thing in my life at least. The last issue this big and this false was prevalent was McCarthyism.
- briholt 9y ago
  "Some groups" includes the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, Rolling Stone, etc.
- usefulcat 9y ago
  "Some groups flat out make up news stories to fit some narrative. What else are you going to call that than 'fake news'?" Thankfully we have a word for that, and it even has a relatively well agreed upon meaning: lies. The problem with the label "fake news" is, as has been pointed out, that it can mean different things to different people.
  - Retric 9y ago
    I think the counter argument is tabloids are not simply called lairs. Weekly world news can have 'Batboy returns' as a headline and sure it's false. But, bookstores also have fiction sections...
- peoplewindow 9y ago
  According to the article Facebook is using the term "false news" to try and sidestep that issue.
TallGuyShort 9y ago
If anyone wants an example of this, look at the coverage of the crowd size at Trump's inauguration. That's still held up as the canonical example of the Trump administration's "alternative facts" (in fact that's when the phrase was coined, I believe). But there's high resolution video of the crowds during the ceremony that clearly contradicts the photos of sparse crowds. I also think the guy is a lying moron, but the fact that that photo is still the cover image for campaigns against him should give people pause...
- kumarvvr 9y ago
  Great example. FB is becoming a tool to assault rationality of gullible people ( mind you, I am an engineer, good exposure to various news sources, etc and I too have fallen for certain news articles), its extremely effective at nudging people into a fantasy comfort zone, and hold them there. The strength of its algorithm increases as a person is nudged further.
- gscott 9y ago
  The crowds up close in the ceremony but further out Obama had more overflow.
  - TallGuyShort 9y ago
    I'm talking about images like this: https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/01/20/us/politics/trump-inauguration-crowd-1484943564224/trump-inauguration-crowd-1484943564224-videoSixteenByNineJumbo1600.jpg https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/01/20/us/politics/trump.... You can count the lanes that run across the mall before you see any open space, and the photo on the right was clearly not taken any time near the actual ceremony because my memory of live video and recorded video during the ceremony simply doesn't come close to matching. I really don't care how it actually compares to Obama, and I really don't see why Trump cared so much, but the fact is the pictures are clearly not "facts" either. Yet disputing them is still held up as a common example of "deniers".
    - jhpriestley 9y ago
maxerickson 9y ago
Yes, there was an intentional campaign to conflate news that people didn't like with sites that were literal fake news, not mistakes or biased coverage, articles made up whole cloth to smear people and such.
riffraff 9y ago
This seems an oversimplification. Yes, some stuff is arguable, mostly when it involves politics, but there is a ton of stuff on facebook like "Bolivia expels McDonalds and Coca-Cola", or "check this video on why positive ions released by salt lamps can cure cancer".

Retric 9y ago

Some groups flat out make up news stories to fit some narrative. What else are you going to call that than 'fake news'? 'Candidate X comes out as gay.' 'Secret photos reveal candidate X at KKK lynching.' Are both rather over the top, but also the kind of lies that influence elections.

menacingly 9y ago
If you don't like that, you're going to hate the physical realm, where anyone can make any claim and you're left with nothing but your wits to discern the truth
- uep 9y ago
  > If you don't like that, you're going to hate the physical realm, where anyone can make any claim and you're left with nothing but your wits to discern the truth So you're saying that we should let these organizations lie as much as they want, because people lie in your day-to-day life? The people you meet in your day-to-day life and lie to your face are much more limited in the number of people they can influence with lies. Why shouldn't we make enormously more powerful institutions more accountable for lies?
- ebola1717 9y ago
  This misunderstands the way technology, social media in particular, have exacerbated problems with misinformation. No one is claiming the media was perfect before. Obviously hoaxes and false rumors have always been a thing. But social media has made disinformation scalable.
  - menacingly 9y ago
    Speed and scale of speech do not impact whether or not it's got an equal seat at the table. It just means you're cool with any expression as long as it's not threatening. Which there's nothing special about, it's how basically everyone is by default. There's no principle there.
    - Retric 9y ago
      Propaganda is used because it works and scale ends up changing type. Consider the difference from 1 dead cell vs 1 million dead cells at the tip of your finger vs 1 billion dead cells in your arm.
      - menacingly 9y ago
        but look at how you're framing it. the undesirable speech isn't a disease the body has, it's a part of the body. we are the collective, even the gross parts. if we want to change what we don't like, we do it with competing ideas, not by cutting them off
        Retric 9y ago
        These are not competing ideas, they are just lies. I have no problem with the Weekly World News being on a fiction shelf, but we have libel laws for a reason. The truth does not have a sign outside saying 'This is true' and lies repeated often enough get a following. PS: There is a huge difference between blowing things that actually happened out of proportion to support an argument and saying anything that someone might believe.
        chrisco255 9y ago
        So what is the definition of "fake news"?
  - chrisco255 9y ago
    For as long as I can remember, National Enquirer and other magazines like that adorned the racks of every grocery store and book store I've ever been to. Yellow journalism was coined as a term over 100 years ago. There's nothing new about "fake news". And it has been scalable since the invention of the printing press.
dsfyu404ed 9y ago
You can find the same crap with slightly better spell checking by the checkout isles in the grocery store. This isn't new.
- graphitezepp 9y ago
  I find it actually kinda worrying that many seem to have a perception that making up news is a new thing. The only thing that has changed is the volume of information, people in control of news sources have been lying since time immemorial.
  - sqeaky 9y ago
    People believing in such vast quantities does seem to be new. I don't know anyone who believed the non-sense in the National Enquirer, but I do know a few people who buy because they think it is funny. People, whole communities of people believe, non-sense today. Not small groups like Flat-earthers or chemtrail theorists who number in the hundreds or thousands (per their website/forums sign-ups). There will always be some people on the fringe. We avoided truly ridiculous ideas for decades. Things like "911 was an inside job" or "Obama was born in Kenya" are believed by tens of millions of people. This is a new thing in my life at least. The last issue this big and this false was prevalent was McCarthyism.
briholt 9y ago
"Some groups" includes the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, Rolling Stone, etc.
usefulcat 9y ago
"Some groups flat out make up news stories to fit some narrative. What else are you going to call that than 'fake news'?" Thankfully we have a word for that, and it even has a relatively well agreed upon meaning: lies. The problem with the label "fake news" is, as has been pointed out, that it can mean different things to different people.
- Retric 9y ago
  I think the counter argument is tabloids are not simply called lairs. Weekly world news can have 'Batboy returns' as a headline and sure it's false. But, bookstores also have fiction sections...
peoplewindow 9y ago
According to the article Facebook is using the term "false news" to try and sidestep that issue.

TallGuyShort 9y ago

If anyone wants an example of this, look at the coverage of the crowd size at Trump's inauguration. That's still held up as the canonical example of the Trump administration's "alternative facts" (in fact that's when the phrase was coined, I believe). But there's high resolution video of the crowds during the ceremony that clearly contradicts the photos of sparse crowds. I also think the guy is a lying moron, but the fact that that photo is still the cover image for campaigns against him should give people pause...

kumarvvr 9y ago
Great example. FB is becoming a tool to assault rationality of gullible people ( mind you, I am an engineer, good exposure to various news sources, etc and I too have fallen for certain news articles), its extremely effective at nudging people into a fantasy comfort zone, and hold them there. The strength of its algorithm increases as a person is nudged further.
gscott 9y ago
The crowds up close in the ceremony but further out Obama had more overflow.
- TallGuyShort 9y ago
  I'm talking about images like this: https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/01/20/us/politics/trump-inauguration-crowd-1484943564224/trump-inauguration-crowd-1484943564224-videoSixteenByNineJumbo1600.jpg https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/01/20/us/politics/trump.... You can count the lanes that run across the mall before you see any open space, and the photo on the right was clearly not taken any time near the actual ceremony because my memory of live video and recorded video during the ceremony simply doesn't come close to matching. I really don't care how it actually compares to Obama, and I really don't see why Trump cared so much, but the fact is the pictures are clearly not "facts" either. Yet disputing them is still held up as a common example of "deniers".
  - jhpriestley 9y ago

maxerickson 9y ago

Yes, there was an intentional campaign to conflate news that people didn't like with sites that were literal fake news, not mistakes or biased coverage, articles made up whole cloth to smear people and such.

riffraff 9y ago

This seems an oversimplification. Yes, some stuff is arguable, mostly when it involves politics, but there is a ton of stuff on facebook like "Bolivia expels McDonalds and Coca-Cola", or "check this video on why positive ions released by salt lamps can cure cancer".