7 ms·

I live in Hungary, there is a hungarian language COVID conspiracy group with 107k members atm. Reported them and nothing happened for weeks, they are growing ea

I live in Hungary, there is a hungarian language COVID conspiracy group with 107k members atm. Reported them and nothing happened for weeks, they are growing easily. And I think nothing will happen. https://www.facebook.com/groups/Normalis.Elethez.Ragaszkodok/ https://www.facebook.com/groups/Normalis.Elethez.Ragaszkodok... There is not even a category to report them because Facebook only has limited options (nudity, harassment, hate speech, unauthorized sales, violence)

outside1234 6y ago
Cut off their advertising in Hungary. They certainly started getting the message here when we did that.
donatj 6y ago
If they're not breaking the rules why report them?
- ceejayoz 6y ago
  COVID disinformation is against is against Facebook's terms. They just don't make it easy to report it. https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/08/05/trump-post-removed-facebook/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/08/05/trump-p... > Facebook spokesman Andy Stone said, “This video includes false claims that a group of people is immune from COVID-19 which is a violation of our policies around harmful COVID misinformation."
  - StreamBright 6y ago
    Pushing against wearing a mask is not based on misinformation unless you qualify the CDC's stance on this misinformation. https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article "Although mechanistic studies support the potential effect of hand hygiene or face masks, evidence from 14 randomized controlled trials of these measures did not support a substantial effect on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza. We similarly found limited evidence on the effectiveness of improved hygiene and environmental cleaning. We identified several major knowledge gaps requiring further research, most fundamentally an improved characterization of the modes of person-to-person transmission."
    - ceejayoz 6y ago
      Our understanding of the effectiveness of masks has progressed substantially since May. That study is not the CDC's current stance (and a single study on their site isn't a stance), nor does it reflect more recent research. Here's July, for example: https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2020/p0714-americans-to-wear-masks.html https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2020/p0714-americans-to-w... > In an editorial published today in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), CDC reviewed the latest science and affirms that cloth face coverings are a critical tool in the fight against COVID-19 that could reduce the spread of the disease, particularly when used universally within communities. There is increasing evidence that cloth face coverings help prevent people who have COVID-19 from spreading the virus to others. > This review included two case studies out today, one from JAMA, showing that adherence to universal masking policies reduced SARS-CoV-2 transmission within a Boston hospital system, and one from CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR), showing that wearing a mask prevented the spread of infection from two hair stylists to their customers in Missouri.
      - ravar 6y ago
        The understanding of effectiveness did not change, what changed is that enough masks were being produced that the supply of medical masks did not need to protected any more. We were lied to at the start. https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/prevention-cures/502890-fauci-why-the-public-wasnt-told-to-wear-masks https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/prevention-c...
        ceejayoz 6y ago
        It's a bit of both. If you go through the literature, there's genuinely very little concrete useful stuff on mask efficacy pre-COVID. "We're not sure" was a pretty reasonable statement back in March. "Masks don't work" like the US Surgeon General was tweeting at the time wasn't a very supportable statement, though. (The lie didn't work, either, and likely harmed trust in public officials on the matter.)
- pjc50 6y ago
  Because they're going to get people killed?
  - StreamBright 6y ago
    Sugar will get people killed by a large factor more. Do you want to ban sugar?
    - cbg0 6y ago
      This is an argument in bad faith. Someone choosing to eat a lot of sugar won't give you health problems, but someone that's sick and not wearing a mask could put you in the grave.
    - pjc50 6y ago
      Your consumption of sugar does not have the ability to get me killed.
      - ghthor 6y ago
        Yes it does, if you get diabetes you could kill me from your car, or take up critical health resources that lead to me not getting treatment. Sugar is dangerous.
  - cosmojg 6y ago
    Shouldn't people be held responsible for their own decisions?
    - pjc50 6y ago
      Criminal liability is inappropriate for people spreading disease unless you can really prove intent. And, frankly, trying to prosecute 200k people is infeasible.
      - selimthegrim 6y ago
        Civil liability? Taking away federal funding to sheriffs who refuse to enforce mask rules?
anxlPA 6y ago
Good to see that reporting people is alive and well, in Hungary of all places. > There is not even a category to report them because Facebook only has limited options. I understand that 50 years ago reporting was easier, but you'll have to take what is available.
StreamBright 6y ago
"The only sure weapon against bad ideas is better ideas." Alfred Whitney Griswold It is not your or Facebook's job to censor people. Btw. Sweden made most of the things work what this particular group is asking for (no masks). Do you want to ban Sweden too?
- ceejayoz 6y ago
  > "The only sure weapon against bad ideas is better ideas." Weird how "let's not send the Jews to the gas chambers" didn't catch on in Nazi Germany. Good ideas sometimes get swamped by bad ideas pushed by effective people/propaganda. It's quite clear from human history that good ideas are neither a sure weapon, nor a fast one.
- jariel 6y ago
  "The only sure weapon against bad ideas is better ideas." ? In the commons, there is limited ability to discriminate between 'good' and 'bad' ideas. Among the crowds, the craziest ideas usually win. Individuals are intelligent, but crowds are dumb. Most people who push for ultra freedom of expression think of it in intellectual terms, you know, people having reasonable discussion, but it's not that, it's yelling, cursing, death threats, crazy ideas and 'actual racism' (and I mean the bad stuff like 'kill all those XYZ people, they are cockroaches').
- sfkdjf9j3j 6y ago
  This assumes people are "debating" in good faith, with the goal to reach an objective truth, which they are not.
  - seneca 6y ago
    So you understand people's unstated motivations and get to ban them from speaking based on that?
    - seppin 6y ago
      No, but if only one side is actually debating and the other is just trolling for reactions, there's no possibility for "good" ideas to ever even meet bad ones, much less defeat them.
csnover 6y ago
> There is not even a category to report them because Facebook only has limited options (nudity, harassment, hate speech, unauthorized sales, violence) It is the same on Twitter and YouTube, and probably on every other social networking site. There is an unending stream of blatant misinformation spread by accounts ranging from ‘misinformed loudmouth’ to ‘obvious troll’, and no options to report these posts or users. It is frustrating. If these companies really want to tackle misinformation, the very least they could do is have a mechanism that collects reports for analysis.
- lixtra 6y ago
  While you may not get it censored, you can still fight it: You can write replies. Or you can approach your peers that seem to believe false information and try to enlighten them.
  - csnover 6y ago
    This is a response to an argument I did not make. I could choose to spend 24 hours a day replying to misinformation. This won’t get the misinformation off the platform even though it’s against the rules of the platform for it to be there in the first place. They need public-facing mechanisms to report content so it can be removed, just like all the other disallowed content which can be reported. It’s not good enough to plaster “get the facts” banners above the comments section or in users’ feeds, or occasionally take sweeping actions against highly visible groups/accounts. My frustration is that no option exists to report misinformation even though (1) it’s banned content, and (2) the reporting mechanism is already there.
  - elliekelly 6y ago
    The peddlers of misinformation seem to have an uncanny ability to be presented with evidence that they’re misinformed and use it as an opportunity to double down and repeat their misinformation. I don’t know the right answer but I’m skeptical there’s an upside to engaging with them.
    - csnover 6y ago
grugagag 6y ago
I notice conspiracy groups are very popular atm. Couldn’t this be used to spread conspiracises that are not conspiracies and to educate people in more layman terms? I think a lot of people don’t understand science and are intimidated by it and turn to conapiracies because they are easily digestable and worded on their understanding.
- ta17711771 6y ago
  Your comment is difficult to parse. Please embrace the difference between "conspiracy" and "conspiracy theory".
  - grugagag 6y ago
    I see how my comment may be comfusing to you so let me explain what I had in mind: those conspiracy channels are flooded with crap that is fabricated in russian propaganda and misinformation labs or by white extremists or ehat not. I think it could be relatively easy to flood those channels with non-misinformation, very easily digestible news and information that is written simple for the lowest common denominator. It could make a positive difference imo
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
- mercer 6y ago
  > I think a lot of people don’t understand science and are intimidated by it and turn to conapiracies because they are easily digestable and worded on their understanding. That's what makes it so difficult to 'package' truth as a conspiracy.
nicc 6y ago
Reported them for what, exactly..?
mercer 6y ago
A few days ago our PM (Netherlands) did the first 'covid press conference' in a few weeks. I watched it on YouTube with live comments turned on, and it was off-putting. Obviously YouTube comments are generally quite shit, but this was an unending stream of Bill Gates/5G/anti-vaxxer conspiracies. I've also already met a handful of them in my day to day life, and these were not particularly crazy or uneducated people.

outside1234 6y ago

Cut off their advertising in Hungary. They certainly started getting the message here when we did that.

donatj 6y ago

If they're not breaking the rules why report them?

ceejayoz 6y ago
COVID disinformation is against is against Facebook's terms. They just don't make it easy to report it. https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/08/05/trump-post-removed-facebook/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/08/05/trump-p... > Facebook spokesman Andy Stone said, “This video includes false claims that a group of people is immune from COVID-19 which is a violation of our policies around harmful COVID misinformation."
- StreamBright 6y ago
  Pushing against wearing a mask is not based on misinformation unless you qualify the CDC's stance on this misinformation. https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article "Although mechanistic studies support the potential effect of hand hygiene or face masks, evidence from 14 randomized controlled trials of these measures did not support a substantial effect on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza. We similarly found limited evidence on the effectiveness of improved hygiene and environmental cleaning. We identified several major knowledge gaps requiring further research, most fundamentally an improved characterization of the modes of person-to-person transmission."
  - ceejayoz 6y ago
    Our understanding of the effectiveness of masks has progressed substantially since May. That study is not the CDC's current stance (and a single study on their site isn't a stance), nor does it reflect more recent research. Here's July, for example: https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2020/p0714-americans-to-wear-masks.html https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2020/p0714-americans-to-w... > In an editorial published today in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), CDC reviewed the latest science and affirms that cloth face coverings are a critical tool in the fight against COVID-19 that could reduce the spread of the disease, particularly when used universally within communities. There is increasing evidence that cloth face coverings help prevent people who have COVID-19 from spreading the virus to others. > This review included two case studies out today, one from JAMA, showing that adherence to universal masking policies reduced SARS-CoV-2 transmission within a Boston hospital system, and one from CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR), showing that wearing a mask prevented the spread of infection from two hair stylists to their customers in Missouri.
    - ravar 6y ago
      The understanding of effectiveness did not change, what changed is that enough masks were being produced that the supply of medical masks did not need to protected any more. We were lied to at the start. https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/prevention-cures/502890-fauci-why-the-public-wasnt-told-to-wear-masks https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/prevention-c...
      - ceejayoz 6y ago
        It's a bit of both. If you go through the literature, there's genuinely very little concrete useful stuff on mask efficacy pre-COVID. "We're not sure" was a pretty reasonable statement back in March. "Masks don't work" like the US Surgeon General was tweeting at the time wasn't a very supportable statement, though. (The lie didn't work, either, and likely harmed trust in public officials on the matter.)
pjc50 6y ago
Because they're going to get people killed?
- StreamBright 6y ago
  Sugar will get people killed by a large factor more. Do you want to ban sugar?
  - cbg0 6y ago
    This is an argument in bad faith. Someone choosing to eat a lot of sugar won't give you health problems, but someone that's sick and not wearing a mask could put you in the grave.
  - pjc50 6y ago
    Your consumption of sugar does not have the ability to get me killed.
    - ghthor 6y ago
      Yes it does, if you get diabetes you could kill me from your car, or take up critical health resources that lead to me not getting treatment. Sugar is dangerous.
- cosmojg 6y ago
  Shouldn't people be held responsible for their own decisions?
  - pjc50 6y ago
    Criminal liability is inappropriate for people spreading disease unless you can really prove intent. And, frankly, trying to prosecute 200k people is infeasible.
    - selimthegrim 6y ago
      Civil liability? Taking away federal funding to sheriffs who refuse to enforce mask rules?

anxlPA 6y ago

Good to see that reporting people is alive and well, in Hungary of all places. > There is not even a category to report them because Facebook only has limited options. I understand that 50 years ago reporting was easier, but you'll have to take what is available.

StreamBright 6y ago

"The only sure weapon against bad ideas is better ideas." Alfred Whitney Griswold It is not your or Facebook's job to censor people. Btw. Sweden made most of the things work what this particular group is asking for (no masks). Do you want to ban Sweden too?

ceejayoz 6y ago
> "The only sure weapon against bad ideas is better ideas." Weird how "let's not send the Jews to the gas chambers" didn't catch on in Nazi Germany. Good ideas sometimes get swamped by bad ideas pushed by effective people/propaganda. It's quite clear from human history that good ideas are neither a sure weapon, nor a fast one.
jariel 6y ago
"The only sure weapon against bad ideas is better ideas." ? In the commons, there is limited ability to discriminate between 'good' and 'bad' ideas. Among the crowds, the craziest ideas usually win. Individuals are intelligent, but crowds are dumb. Most people who push for ultra freedom of expression think of it in intellectual terms, you know, people having reasonable discussion, but it's not that, it's yelling, cursing, death threats, crazy ideas and 'actual racism' (and I mean the bad stuff like 'kill all those XYZ people, they are cockroaches').
sfkdjf9j3j 6y ago
This assumes people are "debating" in good faith, with the goal to reach an objective truth, which they are not.
- seneca 6y ago
  So you understand people's unstated motivations and get to ban them from speaking based on that?
  - seppin 6y ago
    No, but if only one side is actually debating and the other is just trolling for reactions, there's no possibility for "good" ideas to ever even meet bad ones, much less defeat them.

csnover 6y ago

> There is not even a category to report them because Facebook only has limited options (nudity, harassment, hate speech, unauthorized sales, violence) It is the same on Twitter and YouTube, and probably on every other social networking site. There is an unending stream of blatant misinformation spread by accounts ranging from ‘misinformed loudmouth’ to ‘obvious troll’, and no options to report these posts or users. It is frustrating. If these companies really want to tackle misinformation, the very least they could do is have a mechanism that collects reports for analysis.

lixtra 6y ago
While you may not get it censored, you can still fight it: You can write replies. Or you can approach your peers that seem to believe false information and try to enlighten them.
- csnover 6y ago
  This is a response to an argument I did not make. I could choose to spend 24 hours a day replying to misinformation. This won’t get the misinformation off the platform even though it’s against the rules of the platform for it to be there in the first place. They need public-facing mechanisms to report content so it can be removed, just like all the other disallowed content which can be reported. It’s not good enough to plaster “get the facts” banners above the comments section or in users’ feeds, or occasionally take sweeping actions against highly visible groups/accounts. My frustration is that no option exists to report misinformation even though (1) it’s banned content, and (2) the reporting mechanism is already there.
- elliekelly 6y ago
  The peddlers of misinformation seem to have an uncanny ability to be presented with evidence that they’re misinformed and use it as an opportunity to double down and repeat their misinformation. I don’t know the right answer but I’m skeptical there’s an upside to engaging with them.
  - csnover 6y ago

grugagag 6y ago

I notice conspiracy groups are very popular atm. Couldn’t this be used to spread conspiracises that are not conspiracies and to educate people in more layman terms? I think a lot of people don’t understand science and are intimidated by it and turn to conapiracies because they are easily digestable and worded on their understanding.

ta17711771 6y ago
Your comment is difficult to parse. Please embrace the difference between "conspiracy" and "conspiracy theory".
- grugagag 6y ago
  I see how my comment may be comfusing to you so let me explain what I had in mind: those conspiracy channels are flooded with crap that is fabricated in russian propaganda and misinformation labs or by white extremists or ehat not. I think it could be relatively easy to flood those channels with non-misinformation, very easily digestible news and information that is written simple for the lowest common denominator. It could make a positive difference imo
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
mercer 6y ago
> I think a lot of people don’t understand science and are intimidated by it and turn to conapiracies because they are easily digestable and worded on their understanding. That's what makes it so difficult to 'package' truth as a conspiracy.

nicc 6y ago

Reported them for what, exactly..?

mercer 6y ago

A few days ago our PM (Netherlands) did the first 'covid press conference' in a few weeks. I watched it on YouTube with live comments turned on, and it was off-putting. Obviously YouTube comments are generally quite shit, but this was an unending stream of Bill Gates/5G/anti-vaxxer conspiracies. I've also already met a handful of them in my day to day life, and these were not particularly crazy or uneducated people.