SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
posted by
martyb
on Friday September 14 2018, @01:40AM
from the positing-parody-posts-perplexify-perusers dept.
from the positing-parody-posts-perplexify-perusers dept.
Facebook will start fact-checking images and videos, the company said Thursday, expanding its review efforts to posts that are traditionally harder to monitor.
"People share millions of photos and videos on Facebook every day. We know that this kind of sharing is particularly compelling because it's visual. That said, it also creates an easy opportunity for manipulation by bad actors," Facebook said in a blog post.
Edited photos and strong visuals were common among the posts by Russian agents attempting to interfere with the 2016 U.S. presidential election and other global elections, according to examples released by members of Congress.
Meme Review! Meme Police!
Also at Engadget, The Washington Post, and MarketWatch.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Facebook Will Fact Check Images and Videos
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 39 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(Score: 2, Redundant) by jmorris on Friday September 14 2018, @07:06PM (2 children)
Learn to use a search engine. The Clinton campaign wrote off the expense as "legal fees" to hide it. Perkins Coie laundering that money over to Fusion for "oppo research" is NOT a permissible legal services expense. It was money laundering, pure and simple. She needed a cutout because she knew what Fusion was going to do was highly illegal, i.e. colluding with Russian intelligence through yet another cutout by the name of Christopher Steele. Again, none of this is disputed at this point, all of the RUSSIA! RUSSIA! RUSSIA! investigating, persecuting and carrying on assumes all of what I wrote is true but somehow a sin of the Trump campaign. The somehow is never clearly stated because it is of course madness.
More howling madness is how a Special Prosecutor appointed to conduct a counter intelligence investigation is involved with a porn star and a dozen other side issues having no discernible link to a counter intelligence investigation, but perhaps that will become clear in 2025 when his final report is released. Perhaps. We know it is all just a joke, the media breathlessly reporting every unimportant detail, Mad Maxine shouting "Impeach 45!", all of them. It is just a joke at this point. Trump allows them to keep the joke going, goads them to keep going in fact, because he bets the public realizes it is a joke and it will hurt his enemies and he seems to thrive on chaos. Plus Trump knows that if Mueller did hand in a final report, saying nothing of course because the only crimes committed were by Hillary and he is With Her, the Democrats will simply lay this one aside and grab the next "big scandal" that bubbles up from the Think Progress fever swamp and have another go. Trump is basically now using Mueller to conduct a denial of service attack on the Democratic Media Scandal Machine by soaking up all available media bandwidth.
And you are a partisan moron who might allow the reality of the situation into your head in a decade or two when it is all safely out of current events.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Aegis on Friday September 14 2018, @09:31PM (1 child)
"oppo research" is NOT a permissible legal services expense.
A statement for which the only reference is in the opinion section of Fox News.
The FEC is aware of this allegation but isn't taking any action. [fec.gov]
And that's Trump's FEC, if there was something there I'm pretty sure they'd be on it...
(Score: 3, Touché) by jmorris on Saturday September 15 2018, @01:16AM
Are you really unable to think and reason for yourself? Do you need everything spoonfed from an approved source? Can you read?
Campaign finance laws are not a new thing. You can't file your reports saying you spent the money on thing A and really A tunneled the money into B. Oppo research is a thing, and normally (if one isn't colluding with both British and Russian Intelligence agencies) quite legal. But you have to actually account the money as spent on that. Legal fees are also quite normal and legal. What is neither normal or legal is funneling money declared as one into the other and then declaring atty client priv to avoid having to reveal any of it. If that were actually legal every campaign would show one line item on their disclosure forms, legal fees. Try thinking, you might grow to enjoy it. After a few years of swallowing some really bitter red pills of course, waking up and beginning your journey to the Right.