6 ms·

Zuckerberg Dismisses Fact-Checking

43 points by besus 6y ago

mastermojo 6y ago
I like the idea of fact-checking in theory, but in practice the epistemology gets pretty messy. Donald Trump says "The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S manufacturing non-competitive." I think global warming is a fact but it's become so politicized that certain people don't consider it a fact. I think everything lies on a relative scale of fact to "alternative fact", and it's probably less controversial for private companies to be conservative in their censorship. How do you properly refute someones conspiracy theory anyways?
- toss1 6y ago
  >> "How do you properly refute someones conspiracy theory anyways" As usual, with actual facts, based on hard reality and hundreds of years of scientific method. Or recognize and point out, that it is so detached from such reality that, as physicists often note about the nutters writing in: "it isn't even wrong". Of course, that doesn't often work for those deeply embedded in conspiracy theory, or actively spreading dezinformatsiya. You can't convince them, but you can point out for others who are not all the way into nutter-land, that maybe they shouldn't keep going down that path. Currently the recommendation engines actively push people to extreme views. Zuckerberg had research brought to him showing that Facebook exposed users to more and more extreme views, and that 30% of people joining extreme groups did it by FB's reccmendation. He said he never wanted to hear about it again [1] It is not only fact checking. If you say fact checking is problematic, they could at least not actively encourage falsehoods and extremes. These platforms' tolerance and indeed active spreading of alternative facts, desinformatsiya, outright lies, and extreme conspiracy theories is actively undermining democracy worldwide. They may be profitable for a time, but the externalized damage is insane. Let the downvote brigades get to work. [1]https://news.yahoo.com/mark-zuckerberg-reportedly-brushed-aside-202137623.html https://news.yahoo.com/mark-zuckerberg-reportedly-brushed-as...
  - bcrl 6y ago
    You should really go watch the flat earth documentary "Behind The Curve". The reaction of flat earthers to their experiment failing to support the flat earth theory resulted in them deciding they needed to do a different experiment. The reality is that conspiracy theories are far more about socialization and communities than they are about facts.
    - qnsi 6y ago
      exactly. convincing someone that conspiracy theories are probably not true is way harder than teaching them about scientific method
      - lern_too_spel 6y ago
        Convincing someone to not start believing a conspiracy theory is easier, which is the point of these efforts. I point out conspiracy theories when I see them, not for the benefit of the conspiracy theorist who spouted them but for the benefit of the person who reads those conspiracy theories and the debunking later.
  - every_time_6m 6y ago
    Facts, hard reality, and science don't count for a damn thing when the politically or socially mainstream narrative is hostile to the conclusions they support. Science of race and IQ will be censored, and likely get you a ban to boot. FBI crime statistics will be censored. Any kind of objective or subjective analysis of the outcomes of increasing racial diversity in Europe and the colonies will be met with extreme hostility. In some countries, if the wrong people see it, you may even be criminally charged for your curiosity and rationality. Science doesn't mean a damn thing any more. It's all about power. And, temporarily, those who hate us are in power.
jmull 6y ago
> "I just believe strongly that Facebook shouldn't be the arbiter of truth of everything that people say online," No platform really wants to be the arbiter of truth. The problem is, if you punt on that entirely you’re 4chan or some other cesspool. Anyway, Zuck is being pretty disingenuous here, though, because Facebook does have community standards... they just don’t apply to politicians and other influential people. Facebook wants to give them free reign but control regular people. Pretty dystopian, IMO, though hopefully more people will recognize this and drop Facebook.
- kobayashy 6y ago
  what's wrong with 4chan apart from /fit?
- diebeforei485 6y ago
  They can have an independent group of fact checkers to act as a jury of sorts (Facebook did something like this for a while, idk if they still do).
- growlist 6y ago
  The sad truth is: anything that goes against the MSM's agenda is generally better covered on 4chan/alternate cesspool.
  - joubert 6y ago
    Example link?
jasoneckert 6y ago
This statement could very well be the result of a business decision rather than one based on principles or ethics.
- summitsummit 6y ago
  As if anything else was possible from such a source.
SideburnsOfDoom 6y ago
Sorry to hear about the death of Mr Zuckerberg yesterday. Sources: https://www.theshovel.com.au/2020/05/28/mark-zuckerberg-dead-at-36-says-social-media-fact-check/ https://www.theshovel.com.au/2020/05/28/mark-zuckerberg-dead... https://technology.inquirer.net/55533/facebook-accidentally-declares-its-founder-mark-zuckerberg-dead https://technology.inquirer.net/55533/facebook-accidentally-... https://www.businessinsider.com/fake-headlines-mark-zuckerberg-satire-test-facebook-policies-2020-5?r=US&IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/fake-headlines-mark-zuckerbe...

43 points by besus 6y ago

I like the idea of fact-checking in theory, but in practice the epistemology gets pretty messy. Donald Trump says "The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S manufacturing non-competitive." I think global warming is a fact but it's become so politicized that certain people don't consider it a fact. I think everything lies on a relative scale of fact to "alternative fact", and it's probably less controversial for private companies to be conservative in their censorship. How do you properly refute someones conspiracy theory anyways?

toss1 6y ago
>> "How do you properly refute someones conspiracy theory anyways" As usual, with actual facts, based on hard reality and hundreds of years of scientific method. Or recognize and point out, that it is so detached from such reality that, as physicists often note about the nutters writing in: "it isn't even wrong". Of course, that doesn't often work for those deeply embedded in conspiracy theory, or actively spreading dezinformatsiya. You can't convince them, but you can point out for others who are not all the way into nutter-land, that maybe they shouldn't keep going down that path. Currently the recommendation engines actively push people to extreme views. Zuckerberg had research brought to him showing that Facebook exposed users to more and more extreme views, and that 30% of people joining extreme groups did it by FB's reccmendation. He said he never wanted to hear about it again [1] It is not only fact checking. If you say fact checking is problematic, they could at least not actively encourage falsehoods and extremes. These platforms' tolerance and indeed active spreading of alternative facts, desinformatsiya, outright lies, and extreme conspiracy theories is actively undermining democracy worldwide. They may be profitable for a time, but the externalized damage is insane. Let the downvote brigades get to work. [1]https://news.yahoo.com/mark-zuckerberg-reportedly-brushed-aside-202137623.html https://news.yahoo.com/mark-zuckerberg-reportedly-brushed-as...
- bcrl 6y ago
  You should really go watch the flat earth documentary "Behind The Curve". The reaction of flat earthers to their experiment failing to support the flat earth theory resulted in them deciding they needed to do a different experiment. The reality is that conspiracy theories are far more about socialization and communities than they are about facts.
  - qnsi 6y ago
    exactly. convincing someone that conspiracy theories are probably not true is way harder than teaching them about scientific method
    - lern_too_spel 6y ago
      Convincing someone to not start believing a conspiracy theory is easier, which is the point of these efforts. I point out conspiracy theories when I see them, not for the benefit of the conspiracy theorist who spouted them but for the benefit of the person who reads those conspiracy theories and the debunking later.
- every_time_6m 6y ago
  Facts, hard reality, and science don't count for a damn thing when the politically or socially mainstream narrative is hostile to the conclusions they support. Science of race and IQ will be censored, and likely get you a ban to boot. FBI crime statistics will be censored. Any kind of objective or subjective analysis of the outcomes of increasing racial diversity in Europe and the colonies will be met with extreme hostility. In some countries, if the wrong people see it, you may even be criminally charged for your curiosity and rationality. Science doesn't mean a damn thing any more. It's all about power. And, temporarily, those who hate us are in power.

jmull 6y ago

> "I just believe strongly that Facebook shouldn't be the arbiter of truth of everything that people say online," No platform really wants to be the arbiter of truth. The problem is, if you punt on that entirely you’re 4chan or some other cesspool. Anyway, Zuck is being pretty disingenuous here, though, because Facebook does have community standards... they just don’t apply to politicians and other influential people. Facebook wants to give them free reign but control regular people. Pretty dystopian, IMO, though hopefully more people will recognize this and drop Facebook.

kobayashy 6y ago
what's wrong with 4chan apart from /fit?
diebeforei485 6y ago
They can have an independent group of fact checkers to act as a jury of sorts (Facebook did something like this for a while, idk if they still do).
growlist 6y ago
The sad truth is: anything that goes against the MSM's agenda is generally better covered on 4chan/alternate cesspool.
- joubert 6y ago
  Example link?

jasoneckert 6y ago

This statement could very well be the result of a business decision rather than one based on principles or ethics.

summitsummit 6y ago
As if anything else was possible from such a source.

SideburnsOfDoom 6y ago

Sorry to hear about the death of Mr Zuckerberg yesterday. Sources: https://www.theshovel.com.au/2020/05/28/mark-zuckerberg-dead-at-36-says-social-media-fact-check/ https://www.theshovel.com.au/2020/05/28/mark-zuckerberg-dead... https://technology.inquirer.net/55533/facebook-accidentally-declares-its-founder-mark-zuckerberg-dead https://technology.inquirer.net/55533/facebook-accidentally-... https://www.businessinsider.com/fake-headlines-mark-zuckerberg-satire-test-facebook-policies-2020-5?r=US&IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/fake-headlines-mark-zuckerbe...