SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
"The European Commission has received initial reports by Google, Facebook and Twitter on their efforts to fight fake news and offered the trio a pat on the back and an exhortation to work harder — or else." forbes.com/sites/jillgoldsmith/2019/01/29/eu-prods-facebook-google-twitter-in-fight-against-fake-news/
The three Internet giants along with browser company Mozilla and trade associations representing the advertising industry signed a Code of Practice on Disinformation last fall agreeing to take measures against fake news as a crucial European election cycle gets underway.
"There has been some progress, notably in removing fake accounts and limiting the visibility of sites that promote disinformation. However, additional action is needed to ensure full transparency of political ads by the start of the campaign for the European elections in all EU Member States," the organization said in a statement.
Monthly reports will follow from February through May. In a year, at the end of 2019, the Commission will conduct a comprehensive assessment and "should the results prove unsatisfactory ... may propose further actions, including of a regulatory nature."
(Score: 4, Insightful) by bradley13 on Sunday February 03 2019, @05:23PM (10 children)
There are nutcases out there, who can use the Internet to promote whatever crazy theory their personal hallucinations have dreamed up. This is fake news.
On the other side, we have solid, well-research, factual reporting. Um...well...this is at least a theoretical possibility. This is real news.
The problem is the immense gray zone in between. In actual fact, pretty much everything falls somewhere in that gray zone. Where you draw the line is important. More: who draws the line is important, because people will want to draw the line to suit their personal beliefs and biases.
Then we have Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states: "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."
Censorship is evil, full stop. Fake news, for better or for worse, has as much right to be expressed as anything else...
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Sunday February 03 2019, @05:52PM (4 children)
The Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation.
I don't see a whole lot of difference between altering the outcome of 2016 and opening fire on a US naval fleet.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 03 2019, @06:49PM (3 children)
Example: the whole Trump-Russia association, fabricated by a woman whose Clinton Foundation took over a hundred million dollars from Russia
(Score: 5, Interesting) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Sunday February 03 2019, @07:46PM (2 children)
The claim of Trump's that he's the subject of a "Democrat Witch Hunt" is specious, given the numbers of Republican FBI Agents and Justice Department Prosecutors who've been working on the case.
While I'm dead certain that Trump intentionally colluded with Putin, I'm also completely convinced that Trump really _does_ believe there was no collusion.
It's a particularly severe form of a well-known phenomenon is Social Psychology called "Cognitive Dissonance". Simply put, if a person who thinks of themselves as good, ethical or just deliberately hurts an undeserving victim, that will set up a Dissonance - or conflict - in their mind. The correct resolution would be for the perpetrator to regard themselves as bad, unethical or unjust, but in many - maybe most - cases that's far too difficult for them to do.
So instead, they blame the victim.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 03 2019, @09:59PM (1 child)
Robert Mueller is mainly "swamp" and "deep state" and "uniparty" of course. The fact that he may have once long ago done something republican-related does not make him a republican today.
Robert Mueller's team is all Hillary supporters. Were he an actual republican, that wouldn't be the case.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday February 03 2019, @11:11PM
I bet he salts his oatmeal too, doesn't he. Nae trrrroo Scotsman salts his oats!
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 03 2019, @06:01PM
Quite [twitter.com]
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Sunday February 03 2019, @06:09PM (1 child)
Part of the problem is that there are shadings of gray in the gray zone. Some examples of this:
1. We see this thing happen on video. The context might be misunderstood, but there's no question the thing on video happened.
2. A reporter dug into an issue and talked to a lot of sources in a position to know about the issue. Those sources lie to the reporter as part of a planned leak to the press to accomplish some political purpose. The reporter reports what they learned in good faith.
3. Something happened, but the reporter or their news organization doesn't like the implications of that thing happening so they make up context that makes it seem like the thing that happened didn't happen the way it sure looks like it happened.
4. They have video of people genuinely saying things that they said, but it's spliced and edited to make them seem like they're saying something completely different.
5. Lies of omission, where something important that was seen on video or well-documented is completely ignored because it doesn't fit the preferred story.
Treating #1 identically to #4 is going to lead to problems.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Sunday February 03 2019, @06:45PM
1. We see this thing happen on video. The context might be misunderstood, but there's no question the thing on video happened.
Nope
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmUC4m6w1wo [youtube.com]
(Score: 4, Interesting) by NotSanguine on Sunday February 03 2019, @07:19PM
No. Those are the ravings of the mentally disturbed, not "fake news."
The best definition I've heard as to what "fake news" is, came from Tom Nichols [wikipedia.org] in a presentation/discussion [c-span.org] (starting around 27:15) he gave about his book The Death of Expertise [wikipedia.org]:
Yes, censorship is evil. and calling out fake news as the lies they are is just as much a right (and, IMHO, the responsibility of those who can do so) as spewing such lies.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday February 04 2019, @05:12PM
The general citizenry should decide. They should be well educated enough to make good rational decisions.
Instead, we have: Facebook. Sitcoms. The Kardashians. New Jersey. Ancient Aliens on the History Channel. High school kids who can't do basic arithmetic. A president who cannot read or write.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.