5 ms·

I'm so glad big tech screens videos for the correct political viewpoint. Nobody could have predicted events like this.

by coryrc 7y ago

jjulius 7y ago
They screened videos to ensure the facts pertaining to a medical procedure were correct. The fact check itself had nothing to do with politics.
- jMyles 7y ago
  > It had nothing to do with politics. Surely you can see that this is impossible. There is no component of a video like this which has "nothing to do with politics."
  - ceejayoz 7y ago
    Let's say 30-40% of the population takes the political position that the eye is directly attached to the knee. Saying that's not true isn't a political position, even if the falsehood it's debunking is one.
  - jjulius 7y ago
    No, it's not. Please re-read my post. I said that "the fact check itself" is not political. I did not defend the political bias of the video itself. You would also do well to actually read the article, especially the screenshot of the fact-check. You'll notice that the fact-check, per my post, simply addresses the facts of the issue and does not make a single political statement. Edit: You also modified my statement when quoting me, making it more ambiguous than I had written it. Please be sure to quote people accurately in the future.
    - hartator 7y ago
      The thing is FB is not fact checking leftist videos the same way they were doing with the right. Untrue facts about guns for example are never pointed out. Like almost every guns are semi-automatic. Including revolvers and handguns. Making banning semi-automatic weapons in profit of handguns a non-sense.
      - jjulius 7y ago
        >The thing is FB is not fact checking leftist videos the same way they were doing with the right. Can you please provide data that supports this statement? >Untrue facts about guns for example are never pointed out. Using absolutes such as "never" in a statement like that can often be a bit of a stretch. Like my last question, do you have proof that Facebook has never fact-checked a single gun video?
        hartator 7y ago
        I mean the burden of the proof is on you not on me. Find an anti-gun video or content that has been fact checked by FB. And you can't. All the fact checks we are seeing is against right wing content.
        jjulius 7y ago
        "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."
        hartator 7y ago
        It's just because you can't find any content. It will be very easy to prove I am not right on this one by pointing to one video.
        fzeroracer 7y ago
        I believe Facebook is censoring the existence of molemen located deep within the third layer of our hollow earth. I am correct, because you cannot find a single video on Facebook which posits the existence of said molemen. Therefore, Facebook is censoring those videos.
        hartator 7y ago
        You can find tons of videos on FB advocating gun control. But none are fact checked. Despite containing blatant untrue information.
  - bdamm 7y ago
    Objective truth does exist. That abortion is medically necessary in certain cases, including before 24 weeks, is an objective truth. Those wishing for alternatives sometimes will claim that the technology for resolving cases without abortion could exist if we researched it might have a point, but it remains theoretical and therefore, given today's technology, abortion is sometimes medically required. The rest of it might be politics, but that doesn't mean we have to ignore objective facts.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
- scoobyyabbadoo 7y ago
  In France it's illegal to show a picture of a downs person who is happy, just in case it makes a woman think twice about aborting one.
  - aaomidi 7y ago
    This... this is fascinating. Do you have any good sources?
    - ceejayoz 7y ago
      No, because it's BS. Five seconds on Google: https://www.lemonde.fr/cinema/article/2017/11/15/l-ecole-de-la-vie-des-adultes-trisomiques-en-quete-d-autonomie_5215009_3476.html https://www.lemonde.fr/cinema/article/2017/11/15/l-ecole-de-...
      - JasonFruit 7y ago
        There was one particular example, intended to encourage pregnant women to allow their Downs-syndrome babies to be born, that was disallowed by the group that determines what may be shown on French television. So not illegal, but the effect was similar, at least in that case.
        ceejayoz 7y ago
        Unsurprisingly, it's a bit more nuanced in that case. Google Translate isn't great for legalistic documents, but that decision (https://www.conseil-etat.fr/fr/arianeweb/CE/decision/2016-11-10/384691 https://www.conseil-etat.fr/fr/arianeweb/CE/decision/2016-11...) seems to rest quite a bit on whether or not it's an issue advocacy ad, which apparently require disclosures in France similar to how US campaign ads have to have "I approved this message" sort of things. "France requires political ad to include disclosures" is, of course, slightly less punchy as a news item.
        JasonFruit 7y ago
- coryrc 7y ago
  I missed this before, but the problem is _what_ they choose to fact check, not how; and this is evidence of how susceptible they are to political pressure (in a negative way, this time).

I'm so glad big tech screens videos for the correct political viewpoint. Nobody could have predicted events like this.

by coryrc 7y ago

I'm so glad big tech screens videos for the correct political viewpoint. Nobody could have predicted events like this.

They screened videos to ensure the facts pertaining to a medical procedure were correct. The fact check itself had nothing to do with politics.

jMyles 7y ago
> It had nothing to do with politics. Surely you can see that this is impossible. There is no component of a video like this which has "nothing to do with politics."
- ceejayoz 7y ago
  Let's say 30-40% of the population takes the political position that the eye is directly attached to the knee. Saying that's not true isn't a political position, even if the falsehood it's debunking is one.
- jjulius 7y ago
  No, it's not. Please re-read my post. I said that "the fact check itself" is not political. I did not defend the political bias of the video itself. You would also do well to actually read the article, especially the screenshot of the fact-check. You'll notice that the fact-check, per my post, simply addresses the facts of the issue and does not make a single political statement. Edit: You also modified my statement when quoting me, making it more ambiguous than I had written it. Please be sure to quote people accurately in the future.
  - hartator 7y ago
    The thing is FB is not fact checking leftist videos the same way they were doing with the right. Untrue facts about guns for example are never pointed out. Like almost every guns are semi-automatic. Including revolvers and handguns. Making banning semi-automatic weapons in profit of handguns a non-sense.
    - jjulius 7y ago
      >The thing is FB is not fact checking leftist videos the same way they were doing with the right. Can you please provide data that supports this statement? >Untrue facts about guns for example are never pointed out. Using absolutes such as "never" in a statement like that can often be a bit of a stretch. Like my last question, do you have proof that Facebook has never fact-checked a single gun video?
      - hartator 7y ago
        I mean the burden of the proof is on you not on me. Find an anti-gun video or content that has been fact checked by FB. And you can't. All the fact checks we are seeing is against right wing content.
        jjulius 7y ago
        "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."
        hartator 7y ago
        It's just because you can't find any content. It will be very easy to prove I am not right on this one by pointing to one video.
        fzeroracer 7y ago
        I believe Facebook is censoring the existence of molemen located deep within the third layer of our hollow earth. I am correct, because you cannot find a single video on Facebook which posits the existence of said molemen. Therefore, Facebook is censoring those videos.
        hartator 7y ago
        You can find tons of videos on FB advocating gun control. But none are fact checked. Despite containing blatant untrue information.
- bdamm 7y ago
  Objective truth does exist. That abortion is medically necessary in certain cases, including before 24 weeks, is an objective truth. Those wishing for alternatives sometimes will claim that the technology for resolving cases without abortion could exist if we researched it might have a point, but it remains theoretical and therefore, given today's technology, abortion is sometimes medically required. The rest of it might be politics, but that doesn't mean we have to ignore objective facts.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
scoobyyabbadoo 7y ago
In France it's illegal to show a picture of a downs person who is happy, just in case it makes a woman think twice about aborting one.
- aaomidi 7y ago
  This... this is fascinating. Do you have any good sources?
  - ceejayoz 7y ago
    No, because it's BS. Five seconds on Google: https://www.lemonde.fr/cinema/article/2017/11/15/l-ecole-de-la-vie-des-adultes-trisomiques-en-quete-d-autonomie_5215009_3476.html https://www.lemonde.fr/cinema/article/2017/11/15/l-ecole-de-...
    - JasonFruit 7y ago
      There was one particular example, intended to encourage pregnant women to allow their Downs-syndrome babies to be born, that was disallowed by the group that determines what may be shown on French television. So not illegal, but the effect was similar, at least in that case.
      - ceejayoz 7y ago
        Unsurprisingly, it's a bit more nuanced in that case. Google Translate isn't great for legalistic documents, but that decision (https://www.conseil-etat.fr/fr/arianeweb/CE/decision/2016-11-10/384691 https://www.conseil-etat.fr/fr/arianeweb/CE/decision/2016-11...) seems to rest quite a bit on whether or not it's an issue advocacy ad, which apparently require disclosures in France similar to how US campaign ads have to have "I approved this message" sort of things. "France requires political ad to include disclosures" is, of course, slightly less punchy as a news item.
        JasonFruit 7y ago
coryrc 7y ago
I missed this before, but the problem is _what_ they choose to fact check, not how; and this is evidence of how susceptible they are to political pressure (in a negative way, this time).