SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the no-more-profits-from-false-prophets dept.
Google and Facebook finally announced steps to tackle fake news on their respective platforms this week following increasing pressure from critics eager to halt the flow of falsehoods online.
Both companies said they will prohibit fake news websites from advertising on their platforms, thus reducing the exposure of such articles to the public while also starving the companies of an important source of advertising income.
The move comes after the companies received a wave of criticism over its role in propagating misinformation, particularly in this election cycle in which many observed that a bitter partisan war was potentially worsened by polarizing news sources touting untrue assertions. While the technology companies have in the past been hesitant to mediate the flow of news, this change might signal a change in thought as they come to grip with the real-life implications of lackluster surveillance on their platforms.
Wrongthink will not be permitted, citizens.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 18 2016, @07:23PM
In every town I ever lived in, the paper with biggest circulation (often the ONLY paper) was always the one promoting a big, overbearing nanny state. After the first dozen, I just started to assume that all the major papers were propoganda producers fit only for lining birdcages.
No one wants to pay for trash. Come up with something worthwhile and prove me wrong. SN isn't a producer of news, but a forum based around newsy things, and while it doesn't appear to be making a living for anyone, the monetary bills seem to be getting covered. Even my broke butt bought a year's subscription (more than a year ago).
(Score: 2) by Username on Friday November 18 2016, @10:03PM
That’s because most newspapers in a region are usually made by one company. That company is probably Gannett (in the United States). Gannett came out and publicly endorsed Hillary Clinton this year, throwing off all obligations they’ve previously made about being impartial.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @12:23AM
I know I'm quibbling about anecdotes, but I've lived in towns and cities all over the USA, with the exception of the east and west coasts. It's uncanny - "everyone" refers to their local paper as "that liberal rag", and has for decades. (It's a little different in the larger cities, but that shouldn't be a surprise.)
Good - let the current crop of journalists die. Deception should never be rewarded with success.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:38AM
Gannett came out and publicly endorsed Hillary Clinton this year, throwing off all obligations they’ve previously made about being impartial.
But, but, endorsing Clinton is impartial! Even Arizona newspapers did it! The only ones that did not were white-supremicist or owned by crazy Korean religious cults. Not endorsing batshit crazy does not mean you are not being impartial. And just wait, after the Electoral College votes, Hillary might still be your president! I only mention that because I know it throws fear and loathing into you gullet, and then all that will be forced down your throat as you are waterboarded into supporting the new, true! president of the United States of America, Hillary Rodham Clinton. Wait. It's gonna happen! But even if it doesn't, I image just visualizing the possibility with be enough to put you off your feed.