3 ms·

Regarding what is and isn't fake news, could they not lean on existing organisations. For example: Legitimate news are members of the Independent Press Standar

Regarding what is and isn't fake news, could they not lean on existing organisations. For example: Legitimate news are members of the Independent Press Standards Organisation, or have a licence to broadcast from Ofcom, or something similar. Media on social platforms will be subject to the same standards as those broadcast on television, or written in print. If videos online are 'fake news' then ofcom deal with that the same as they would on television, or ISPO the same as they would in print. For foreign news, they could rely on similar organisations in host countries, or an affiliation with a member. In that regulation, Facebook & Google would agree to revoke the account of the outlet in line with the regulatory organisations guidelines. Any news outlet that is not a member of the independent organisation, or a licencee of Ofcom is considered fake news. In my internal "how reliable is this source", that's pretty much the first check I do in my head.

pjc50 8y ago
The trouble with IPSO is that it's toothless; you can take a look down https://www.ipso.co.uk/rulings-and-resolution-statements/ https://www.ipso.co.uk/rulings-and-resolution-statements/ and see how often the Mail, Express and Sun get ruled against on accuracy.
- lanerobertlane 8y ago
  But if Fake News institutions like Infowars-types were required to be members, the IPSO would have to revoke their membership or face ridicule and undermine the trustworthiness of the rest of the members. And if Infowars wanted to be published on Facebook and Google, they'd have to abide by the IPSO rules.
raxxorrax 8y ago
I cannot see any good in a creation of this kind of institution. How would you manage to keep it independent? Please no central certification for independent journalists. Seriously, this is one of the worst ideas I heard.
- lanerobertlane 8y ago
  There is no need for a creation of the Independent Press Standards Organisation, it already exists and over 1500 print and 1100 online outlets in the UK press are members (notable exceptions are The Independent and The Guardian). Independent journalists usually publish in one of those newspapers, although the NUJ could be used as a suitable alternative?

pjc50 8y ago

The trouble with IPSO is that it's toothless; you can take a look down https://www.ipso.co.uk/rulings-and-resolution-statements/ https://www.ipso.co.uk/rulings-and-resolution-statements/ and see how often the Mail, Express and Sun get ruled against on accuracy.

lanerobertlane 8y ago
But if Fake News institutions like Infowars-types were required to be members, the IPSO would have to revoke their membership or face ridicule and undermine the trustworthiness of the rest of the members. And if Infowars wanted to be published on Facebook and Google, they'd have to abide by the IPSO rules.

raxxorrax 8y ago

I cannot see any good in a creation of this kind of institution. How would you manage to keep it independent? Please no central certification for independent journalists. Seriously, this is one of the worst ideas I heard.

lanerobertlane 8y ago
There is no need for a creation of the Independent Press Standards Organisation, it already exists and over 1500 print and 1100 online outlets in the UK press are members (notable exceptions are The Independent and The Guardian). Independent journalists usually publish in one of those newspapers, although the NUJ could be used as a suitable alternative?