3 ms·

> There is not even a category to report them because Facebook only has limited options (nudity, harassment, hate speech, unauthorized sales, violence) It is t

> 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
    My understanding is that engaging is typically a bad idea because these folks typically fall into one of three buckets: 1. The person believes what they are saying strongly enough to say it openly and conspicuously. Attempts to correct them with facts triggers a backfire effect which causes them to believe the false information even more strongly[0]. 2. The person is a troll. They don’t actually believe what they are saying. They are only saying it in order to make others (you!) upset because it makes them feel powerful[1]. 3. The person is actually a bot or part of a coordinated disinformation campaign. Their goal is to create false division between people to create instability, and engaging only helps them achieve their objective[2]. In all cases, an action which causes people to feel the need to repeat false information may cause more people to believe the false information due to the illusory truth effect[3], which can lead to the sort of spiral we find ourselves in today. My understanding here is that false information existing is not a problem so much as the ubiquity of the false information, and from that perspective it’s more important to make it harder to find than it is to try to correct it. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belief_perseverance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belief_perseverance [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll#Psychological_characteristics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll#Psychological_c... [2] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jul/28/russia-covid-19-disinformation-websites-us-intelligence https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jul/28/russia-covid... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_truth_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_truth_effect
    - bobbygoodlatte 6y ago
      I might add: 4. They're looking to make a profit. Either by selling ads, products, or by building an audience to exploit later. Saying outrageous things you don't believe can unfortunately be quite lucrative. Perhaps it falls under your second category, but I think the profit motive makes them even more motivated & nihilistic than a mere troll.

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
  My understanding is that engaging is typically a bad idea because these folks typically fall into one of three buckets: 1. The person believes what they are saying strongly enough to say it openly and conspicuously. Attempts to correct them with facts triggers a backfire effect which causes them to believe the false information even more strongly[0]. 2. The person is a troll. They don’t actually believe what they are saying. They are only saying it in order to make others (you!) upset because it makes them feel powerful[1]. 3. The person is actually a bot or part of a coordinated disinformation campaign. Their goal is to create false division between people to create instability, and engaging only helps them achieve their objective[2]. In all cases, an action which causes people to feel the need to repeat false information may cause more people to believe the false information due to the illusory truth effect[3], which can lead to the sort of spiral we find ourselves in today. My understanding here is that false information existing is not a problem so much as the ubiquity of the false information, and from that perspective it’s more important to make it harder to find than it is to try to correct it. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belief_perseverance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belief_perseverance [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll#Psychological_characteristics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll#Psychological_c... [2] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jul/28/russia-covid-19-disinformation-websites-us-intelligence https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jul/28/russia-covid... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_truth_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_truth_effect
  - bobbygoodlatte 6y ago
    I might add: 4. They're looking to make a profit. Either by selling ads, products, or by building an audience to exploit later. Saying outrageous things you don't believe can unfortunately be quite lucrative. Perhaps it falls under your second category, but I think the profit motive makes them even more motivated & nihilistic than a mere troll.