Facebook loses Snopes as a fact-checker - CNET
Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
Snopes said Friday that it won't be renewing its fact-checking partnership with Facebook, which kicked off at the end of 2016 to help curb the spread of misinformation.
"At this time we are evaluating the ramifications and costs of providing third-party fact-checking services, and we want to determine with certainty that our efforts to aid any particular platform are a net positive for our online community, publication and staff," Snopes said in a post on its site.
The fact-checking platform said it hasn't ruled out working with Facebook in the future, and hopes to continue to discuss ways to combat misinformation. Snopes also said it hopes Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg meets with fact checkers following his 2019 resolution to "host a series of public discussions about the future of technology in society."
Facebook has faced scrutiny for not taking more action against fake news and misinformation, including interference by Russian trolls during the 2016 US presidential election. Last year, the social network landed in hot water after it was revealed that Cambridge Analytica, a digital consultancy linked to the Trump presidential campaign, improperly accessed data from as many as 87 million Facebook users.
"We value the work that Snopes has done, and respect their decision as an independent business," a Facebook spokesperson said. "Fighting misinformation takes a multi-pronged approach from across the industry. We are committed to fighting this through many tactics, and the work that third-party fact-checkers do is a valued and important piece of this effort."
Facebook says it has relationships with 34 fact-checking partners around the world for content in 16 languages, and it plans to add new partners and languages this year.
-- submitted from IRC
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Saturday February 02 2019, @08:16PM (9 children)
Snopes was a respected fact checking source, until they got into politics. When they hired a progressive to do their "fact checking", they really screwed the pooch. They have a lot of fixing to do before they regain the respect they lost.
https://dailycaller.com/2016/06/17/fact-checking-snopes-websites-political-fact-checker-is-just-a-failed-liberal-blogger/ [dailycaller.com]
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Ethanol-fueled on Saturday February 02 2019, @09:08PM
In other words, you're too stupid to do your own homework and have your own opinion. Kinda makes me sad, I love the idea of Politifact but they too are pozzed with Liberal establishment AIDS.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by black6host on Saturday February 02 2019, @09:35PM (2 children)
All I'm reading is one person's opinion about another. Opinion, not much substance. Now, the author is entitled to their opinion, of course. I'm just not reading anything that makes me think less of Snopes. Are you implying that Snopes should only hire people who are centrists?
I do understand Snopes has lost *your* respect but I'd like to see a bit more before I jump on that bandwagon...
(Score: -1, Troll) by Ethanol-fueled on Saturday February 02 2019, @10:13PM (1 child)
It's not about being centrist, it's about throwing bias out the window and being intelligent enough to do so. Otherwise, curators of information are just propagandists whether or not that is their aim.
And particular attention should be paid to the last names of the authors. If the last name ends in "-berg" or "-stein," then chances are you are reading propaganda rather than unbiased fact.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 03 2019, @03:47AM
So do you think Zuckerberg or Snopes is more believable?
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 02 2019, @11:32PM
Well, since "the truth has a liberal bias", they just wanted to be sure and get someone who can channel that truth.
(Score: 0, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 03 2019, @03:41AM (1 child)
"Snopes was a respected fact checking source"
.
.
Among stupid people perhaps Snopes was respected.
Some of us knew better.
Has anyone ever told you that you're one seriously mentally deficient waste of skin ? You are.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by RandomFactor on Sunday February 03 2019, @02:29PM
I've used them for years as useful links to reply to the assortment of "OMG BLUE FLYING SHARKS ATTACK SEATTLE" or whatever crazy links get sent to me by various parents/relatives/friends.
It's easier than explaining things yourself sometimes.
Snopes has always been useful for that.
Another option is 'The Straight Dope [straightdope.com]' a fact checking column that precedes it by quite a bit, although it isn't as much about the urban legend of the day.
В «Правде» нет известий, в «Известиях» нет правды
(Score: 4, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 03 2019, @04:14AM (1 child)
Obligatory XKCD:
https://xkcd.com/250/ [xkcd.com]
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday February 03 2019, @05:00AM
+1 hilarious
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 5, Touché) by MostCynical on Saturday February 02 2019, @08:57PM (1 child)
fact-checking FB - like using using a teaspoon to bail the Titanic.
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 02 2019, @10:45PM
More precisely, the fact checkers are like the Orchestra.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Rosco P. Coltrane on Saturday February 02 2019, @10:21PM (6 children)
Either FB will roll their own, buy Snopes out, or they'll just make up facts of their own - they already do anyway. In any case, Snopes is a goner.
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 02 2019, @10:51PM (3 children)
The true axel of evil: facebook, google, twitter, microsoft
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 03 2019, @03:49AM (1 child)
It's "axis of evil".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 03 2019, @04:04AM
Careful with that axe, Eugene.
(Score: 4, Funny) by driverless on Monday February 04 2019, @02:30AM
Ahh, the old Axel of Evil. Not to be confused with the Axel of Rose.
(Score: 3, Informative) by black6host on Saturday February 02 2019, @10:56PM
If only it was Buh-bye Facebook..
(Score: 2) by RandomFactor on Sunday February 03 2019, @02:14PM
I thought FB was using SPLC for some of that.
В «Правде» нет известий, в «Известиях» нет правды
(Score: 3, Interesting) by ensigndna on Saturday February 02 2019, @11:04PM
They will either bend to winds of change and flourish, or they won't and will be forgotten nearly as fast as MySpace in a few short years...
I predict the prior but hope for the latter.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 03 2019, @01:02AM
Zuckerberg wasn't wrong when he referred to people who use the service as dumb f*cks. It's not in his interest to have his service point out to people that they're idiots by fact-checking them.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 03 2019, @03:57AM (2 children)
The word "fact" never had much meaning to begin with, and we can stop using it. If I say it's a "fact that X happened", I could have just said "X happened". So "fact-checkers" might as well be called "checkers". The longer expression lends them a legitimacy that they never earned.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Sunday February 03 2019, @04:08AM
Why not call them "draughts" then? Are you game for it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday February 03 2019, @05:03AM
But, we already have a legion of checkers in the country. They work at groceries, and big box stores, and convenience stores.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 3, Funny) by iWantToKeepAnon on Monday February 04 2019, @03:37PM
"Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way." -- Anna Karenina by Leo Tolstoy