4 ms·

Don't forget about WhatsApp. It was the main channel of dissemination of fake news in Brazilian Election. Now we have a global warning denier in the presidency

by neves 7y ago

Don't forget about WhatsApp. It was the main channel of dissemination of fake news in Brazilian Election. Now we have a global warning denier in the presidency and Amazon deforestation is reaching record levels. Sure there isn't any company in the FAANG that is an altruistic enterprise, but to be only pure evil one is Facebook. What really impresses me is that there's still a lot of talented people working there.

imglorp 7y ago
I asked one, who pointed out he'd like to make change from within rather than blog about them being evil from the outside. I don't know which way is right.
- 50656E6973 7y ago
  FB's core business model is the root problem. "Working from within" is vain, naive, and futile; only Zuckerberg has the power to change the business model, and we all know thats not happening.
  - cameronbrown 7y ago
    Unpopular opinion: I don't have a problem with business model (targeted ads) but I have a massive problem with lack of honesty, and this is the distinction between Facebook and Google for me. Google tells you what they collect and gives you the controls to delete it. This is enough for me. Facebook struggles to remember that I want my timeline kept private. I also believe that Cambridge Analytica was no accident, FB knew what they were doing, and they decided to throw them under the bus when they changed the media turned on them. Trust is hard to build up and can be shattered in a day.
pferde 7y ago
Any communication platform that is easy to use and easy to reach people on, and will therefore be popular, is great channel of dissemination of fake news. Well, guess what, it is also a great channel for communicating nonfake news, and talking to people that matter to you, and sharing your interests with likeminded people, and... Blaming the platform for carrying fake news seems disingenuous. Fake news have been spreading over any available channels ever since humans learned to talk and figured out that they can tell lies to each other. Blame people for believing most of anything they're told.
- Barrin92 7y ago
  I think one needs to be very intentionally oblivious to not notice the qualitative difference between fake news of the past and fake news right now. Fake news in the past always had an identifiable source, because there was still an institution, a company, or someone with their name on the door between reader and publisher. As it stands, no such barrier exists any more. Things can be inserted by malicious actors into the debate, and they spread automatically simply because they have the tendency to 'go viral', something entirely absent in the past. That has added a completely new set of problems. >Blame people for believing most of anything they're told Precisely because it is very much in everyone's nature to suffer from these mechanisms it makes no sense to blame ' the people'. What does this imply, a great re-education of everyone? Obviously the only thing we can change is the companies, institutions and rules that determine how we consume the news, not how human brains disseminate them.
  - pferde 7y ago
    Yes, the Internet has made spreading fake news easier, but let me reiterate my argument - the Internet has made communication as a whole easier, so it's only natural that fake news spreads easier. However, that is not the fault of any given communication platform on the Internet, unless that platform happens to explicitly select fake news stories to spread, and suppress anything else. Which certainly is not case for WhatsApp. Even in the past, good old rumor mills (I heard it from a friend of a friend of a cousin's barber) were reigning supreme in spreading bullshit around, by simple word of mouth. The Internet here is just a compounding factor to something that is very, very old and already very, very effective. Edit: expanded first paragraph
    - Barrin92 7y ago
      >Yes, the Internet has made spreading fake news easier, but let me reiterate my argument - the Internet has made communication as a whole easier, so it's only natural that fake news spreads easier. I totally agree, but it doesn't follow that this means that the fake news situation is acceptable, or that Facebook isn't responsible as a platform which the OP argued. With the increased density of urban living came more opportunity but also more crime and disease, but we don't shrug and accept that barowners have no responsibility as platforms, we give them a set of safety and health regulations and responsibilities, and we equip the police with tools to combat crime. So in that spirit, just as the internet isn't the internet of the hacker and small community age, companies should have to deal with the problems they produce. Just like everyone else always had to.
throwawayjohn3 7y ago
> Don't forget about WhatsApp. It was the main channel of dissemination of fake news in Brazilian Election. How would you solve this problem?
- neves 7y ago
  Some suggestions: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/17/opinion/brazil-election-fake-news-whatsapp.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/17/opinion/brazil-election-f...

by neves 7y ago

imglorp 7y ago

I asked one, who pointed out he'd like to make change from within rather than blog about them being evil from the outside. I don't know which way is right.

50656E6973 7y ago
FB's core business model is the root problem. "Working from within" is vain, naive, and futile; only Zuckerberg has the power to change the business model, and we all know thats not happening.
- cameronbrown 7y ago
  Unpopular opinion: I don't have a problem with business model (targeted ads) but I have a massive problem with lack of honesty, and this is the distinction between Facebook and Google for me. Google tells you what they collect and gives you the controls to delete it. This is enough for me. Facebook struggles to remember that I want my timeline kept private. I also believe that Cambridge Analytica was no accident, FB knew what they were doing, and they decided to throw them under the bus when they changed the media turned on them. Trust is hard to build up and can be shattered in a day.

pferde 7y ago

Any communication platform that is easy to use and easy to reach people on, and will therefore be popular, is great channel of dissemination of fake news. Well, guess what, it is also a great channel for communicating nonfake news, and talking to people that matter to you, and sharing your interests with likeminded people, and... Blaming the platform for carrying fake news seems disingenuous. Fake news have been spreading over any available channels ever since humans learned to talk and figured out that they can tell lies to each other. Blame people for believing most of anything they're told.

Barrin92 7y ago
I think one needs to be very intentionally oblivious to not notice the qualitative difference between fake news of the past and fake news right now. Fake news in the past always had an identifiable source, because there was still an institution, a company, or someone with their name on the door between reader and publisher. As it stands, no such barrier exists any more. Things can be inserted by malicious actors into the debate, and they spread automatically simply because they have the tendency to 'go viral', something entirely absent in the past. That has added a completely new set of problems. >Blame people for believing most of anything they're told Precisely because it is very much in everyone's nature to suffer from these mechanisms it makes no sense to blame ' the people'. What does this imply, a great re-education of everyone? Obviously the only thing we can change is the companies, institutions and rules that determine how we consume the news, not how human brains disseminate them.
- pferde 7y ago
  Yes, the Internet has made spreading fake news easier, but let me reiterate my argument - the Internet has made communication as a whole easier, so it's only natural that fake news spreads easier. However, that is not the fault of any given communication platform on the Internet, unless that platform happens to explicitly select fake news stories to spread, and suppress anything else. Which certainly is not case for WhatsApp. Even in the past, good old rumor mills (I heard it from a friend of a friend of a cousin's barber) were reigning supreme in spreading bullshit around, by simple word of mouth. The Internet here is just a compounding factor to something that is very, very old and already very, very effective. Edit: expanded first paragraph
  - Barrin92 7y ago
    >Yes, the Internet has made spreading fake news easier, but let me reiterate my argument - the Internet has made communication as a whole easier, so it's only natural that fake news spreads easier. I totally agree, but it doesn't follow that this means that the fake news situation is acceptable, or that Facebook isn't responsible as a platform which the OP argued. With the increased density of urban living came more opportunity but also more crime and disease, but we don't shrug and accept that barowners have no responsibility as platforms, we give them a set of safety and health regulations and responsibilities, and we equip the police with tools to combat crime. So in that spirit, just as the internet isn't the internet of the hacker and small community age, companies should have to deal with the problems they produce. Just like everyone else always had to.

throwawayjohn3 7y ago

> Don't forget about WhatsApp. It was the main channel of dissemination of fake news in Brazilian Election. How would you solve this problem?

neves 7y ago
Some suggestions: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/17/opinion/brazil-election-fake-news-whatsapp.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/17/opinion/brazil-election-f...