SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the that-didn't-work-out-quite-like-we-hoped dept.
Google has apologized on behalf of its algorithm(s), which promoted a fake news story identifying the wrong man as the recent Las Vegas shooter:
After yesterday's mass shooting in Las Vegas, Google briefly gave its "Top Stories" stamp of approval to two 4chan threads identifying (and triumphantly smearing) the wrong man as the shooter. Google apologized for including "inaccurate" web pages in its top results, saying that its algorithm had spotted a burst of activity around a little-used search term (the name of 4chan's so-called suspect), created a Top Stories carousel, and favored "fresh" content there above more authoritative sources.
This is far from the first time Google's search results have purveyed misinformation. In March, it finally instructed human quality raters — who manually evaluate web pages to train the Search algorithm — to flag offensive and factually incorrect material, which Search could then downgrade for users seeking general information about a topic. As the 4chan incident shows, though, it still has blind spots. And that's not really because of a problem with Google's algorithm. It's happening because Google's core business has never been about defining truth — yet that's what Top Stories is implicitly promising.
Facebook also promoted the "fresh" content:
[A] story by the pro-Trump political website "The Gateway Pundit" named a different person as the shooter, citing a Facebook page to claim the individual was "a far left loon" and "a Democrat who liked (MSNBC host) Rachel Maddow." Posters on the anonymous, anarchic 4chan.org forum likewise trumpeted supposed findings that the same individual was both the shooter and a "social democrat." BuzzFeed saved screenshots of the stories, which no longer turn up on either Gateway Pundit or 4chan.
[...] Facebook said its security team removed Gateway Pundit results and other similar posts from its social network, some within minutes. But because that removal was "delayed," the company said, images of the incorrect story were captured and circulated online.
"We are working to fix the issue that allowed this to happen in the first place and deeply regret the confusion this caused," a Facebook spokesman said in a statement.
Also at BBC.
Previously: Over 50 dead in mass shooting in Las Vegas
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Wednesday October 04 2017, @12:34PM (6 children)
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday October 04 2017, @01:31PM (2 children)
Both your and Ledow's posts are on target. Both Google and Facebook are clickbait pushers. They could care less about the accuracy of anything, so long as you click shit, and make them rich.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 04 2017, @02:05PM (1 child)
"They couldn't care less". I'm guessing you learned grammar from Google and Facebook too. :P
(Score: 5, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 04 2017, @02:47PM
His Grammar is probably dead, you insensitive clod!!
(Score: 3, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday October 04 2017, @04:46PM
I think this makes a good analogy to the Flash Crash(es) on the stock market... algorithms blow up and do unintended things, maybe we improve the algorithms, maybe we just promote awareness that temporary insanity is to be expected from time to time.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 04 2017, @05:20PM (1 child)
You said "news organizations" when I know you meant "'news organizations'".
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday October 05 2017, @01:50AM
(Score: 5, Insightful) by ledow on Wednesday October 04 2017, @12:43PM (9 children)
More important than a "top news" / "popular story" ending up as such on Google/Facebook without fact-checking (okay, not ideal, but it does what it says on the tin - promotes popular stories without any guarantee they're actually true), is that random people think that they can just go hunting people down online vigilante-style without comeback and present what they find as "evidence".
I know, if I were on the receiving end, I would be consulting a lawyer right about now. It's libel/slander of the highest order. You could literally get someone killed like that.
Which is EXACTLY my problem with the people trying to trap child abusers, etc. outside of the police. You get the wrong person and you literally fuck up their life, possibly permanently if some idiot takes it too far. On the basis of rumour and "Facebook research".
Though your intentions may be good, it's far too easy to make a mistake and random chance says that you will eventually. Everyone does. Even the police, the courts, etc. Which is why courts / law enforcement are often loathe to give out names unless they are ABSOLUTELY sure. And why they say "person of interest" or "help with our enquiries" because they know that some portion of those people are entirely innocent and just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time or share the wrong name with someone else.
If you have information, feed it to the police. Crowd-funded vigilantism is only a short step from anarchy.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by NotSanguine on Wednesday October 04 2017, @01:08PM (4 children)
Actually, that's not such a good idea. In fact, at least in the U.S., you should never talk to the police [youtube.com] under any circumstances.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 04 2017, @11:51PM (3 children)
No. An-archy: From the Greek for "without rulers", is a governmental form with the decisions being made as close as is possible to those whom those decisions will affect.
On the political palate, this charts at the far edge from Authoritarianism and is sometimes labeled "Libertarianism".
The word you are seeking is "chaos".
Many poorly educated people confuse the 2 terms.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 04 2017, @11:56PM (1 child)
Clicked 1 comment too low.
Please do forgive my clumsiness.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Thursday October 05 2017, @12:03AM
You are forgiven.
However, you really should watch the video. I think you'll find it eye-opening.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Thursday October 05 2017, @12:02AM
I'm not promoting vigilantism or anarchy.
Merely pointing out that police generally try to pin whatever they can on the easiest target they can find.
If you talk to the police, you become an easy target.
That's not to say you shouldn't call emergency services if there's, say, an emergency. But way too many people have been railroaded into long prison terms just because they wanted to "help out."
Watch the video I linked, _gewg_. It's a lecture for third-year law students by a practicing criminal defense attorney and another third-year law student (who had been a cop for almost 20 years).
Or don't. And talk to the police all you want. But I won't be coming around to post your bail. Good luck with the plea bargain.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 04 2017, @01:25PM (3 children)
I mostly agree with you, but you imply that the police are somehow different? That they don't fuck up people's lives when they go after a wrong suspect? Basically all the protections for the wrongly accused are in court, but by the time you're actually on trial, your life is already fucked up.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by bzipitidoo on Wednesday October 04 2017, @02:12PM (2 children)
True. I've heard the difference between "jail" and "prison" is that the first is for suspects, and the second is for the convicted. You can be jailed without any conviction, just suspicion. They're not supposed to hold you for long. Seems there should be a standard on that, 3 days maximum? Yet there are people who were left to rot in jail for months without ever being formally charged. Happens through carelessness, neglect, and bureaucracy, and sometimes vindictiveness.
Even 1 day in jail can mess up your life. While in jail, obviously you can't go to work, and a lot of employers will fire you in an instant for missing work because you were in jail. You can't pay bills either. When released, you may no longer have a job and be facing a bunch of penalties for being late with bills. Maybe you're even facing eviction. And there's the suspicion that maybe you are a criminal, even though you were never charged with a crime. As if that's not bad enough, the prison system itself loves to pile on fees. Phone calls are extremely expensive. The poor get the harshest treatment, are the most likely to have that low paying job with the fire-you-in-a-heartbeat for the-least-tiny-mistake management, and to be constantly treated as if already guilty, because everyone just knows the poor are more likely to commit crimes.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Wednesday October 04 2017, @03:12PM
In fact they should be called openbsd prisons. I have fellows who lived there all the time.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by mhajicek on Wednesday October 04 2017, @03:44PM
On top of that you can be held in prison for two years while awaiting trial.
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 4, Informative) by idiot_king on Wednesday October 04 2017, @12:57PM (11 children)
People wonder how fake news spreads? THIS is how! We need stronger algorithms, or better yet, just omit those crazy nut websites from Google altogether. The only people that need to know about them are the ones that ALREADY know about them (InfoWars, Zerohedge, other far-right fake news moron sites). Just let the idiots stay in their tanks. Goes to show how much better we can do with deep learning and web search. Here's to hoping to an idiot-free future (fingers super crossed).
(Score: 4, Touché) by ewk on Wednesday October 04 2017, @01:38PM
'hoping to an idiot-free future'...
So... who are you going to be king of then? :-)
I don't always react, but when I do, I do it on SoylentNews
(Score: 3, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday October 04 2017, @04:39PM (2 children)
Before 4chan, reddit and Facebook, it was the Drudge report and DIGG, and next year there will be a new one. Quality of information varies constantly.
All the algorithms know is what the chatter says - they have little, if any, ability to discern the quality of that chatter. Maybe in the future that will come, but these are still early days on the information frontier.
Also, beware of wishing for "quality filters" on the leading sources of information - that's another step back down the road of implicit censorship for the poor masses.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Wednesday October 04 2017, @09:01PM (1 child)
Yeah...but, at large search and/or social sites like Google and Facebook any link to sites such as Gateway Pundit or 4chan should through up some big flags.
When life isn't going right, go left.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Thursday October 05 2017, @02:40AM
As should the tabloid rags, etc... who makes those calls?
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 04 2017, @07:23PM
Bill Clinton is a Rapist!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 04 2017, @09:23PM
Or Google could just start acting like a search engine and stop trying to hide results and keep people in their bubbles. Facebook should just vanish from existence. Everyone should refuse to use monstrous surveillance engines like Google and Facebook.
In any case, the problem is hardly that people can find bad things on these atrocious 'services'.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 04 2017, @11:21PM
Or, maybe--just perhaps--people could be a whole lot less fucking gullible. Look, I despise the purveyors of fake news just as much as anyone, but the next time you get duped by a fake news story, maybe the first place you need to look for someone to hold accountable is staring right back out at you from your mirror. Just a thought.
Oh, don't worry. I wouldn't dream of chasing you and your idiot pals out of your tanks..
Indeed.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 04 2017, @11:47PM
It's going to take a bit more than crossing of fingers and hoping to achieve an "idiot-free" future. First, you will need to do a bit of discerning fact checking of your own on the news you consume. What's that you say? That's just too much hard work? In that case you will just have to resign yourself to quite a lot more idiocy in your future.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 05 2017, @12:32AM (2 children)
Google is already censoring.
The thing is that what they are censoring are some the more reliable, fact-based sites.
Previous submissions:
Evidence of Google's Blacklisting of Left, Progressive, and Anti-War Sites Mounts [soylentnews.org]
Google's Blacklisting (addendum) [soylentnews.org]
The veracity of those sites:
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/world-socialist-web-site/#page-17089 [mediabiasfactcheck.com]
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/consortium-news/#page-5281 [mediabiasfactcheck.com]
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/media-matters/#page-651 [mediabiasfactcheck.com]
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/common-dreams/#page-605 [mediabiasfactcheck.com]
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/democracy-now/#page-4082 [mediabiasfactcheck.com]
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/wikileaks/#page-6024 [mediabiasfactcheck.com]
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/counterpunch/#page-607 [mediabiasfactcheck.com]
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-intercept/#page-896 [mediabiasfactcheck.com]
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/american-civil-liberties-union-aclu/ [mediabiasfactcheck.com]
.
Note that Media Bias/Fact Check has put styling in their HTML and hasn't verified that.
Their pages, viewed as HTML-only, have black text on a black background.
(View; Use Style; No Style)
They REALLY should validate their crappy code. [w3.org]
5. Fatal Error: Cannot recover after last error. Any further errors will be ignored.
[1] I am irritated by entities which call things "Leftist" when those are NOT Anti-Capitalist.
Organizations which make no distinction between Right-Center and Left aren't doing their jobs properly.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by jmorris on Thursday October 05 2017, @02:08AM (1 child)
You really are that retarded aren't you? You are trusting a "media fact check" site that flags Wikileaks as RIGHT-CENTER BIASED (caps in original) and passes on World Socialist, Media Matters, Common Dreams and the rest of your commie go-to news sources with only a passing note that they have an opinion? And you expect sane people to not laugh at you? Actually most really sane people will nod politely and quickly walk away because you give off a dangerous loon vibe.
And Google is censoring a heck of a lot more than the most crazed voices in the Left fever swamp. They also aren't demonitizing the left's Youtube vids. And they aren't seizing the left's domain names.
This debate about indexing the chans and reddit into the normal Google search is silly anyway, nobody should be looking to anonymous shitpoasters for news. They DO dig and over time can turn up interesting nuggets but it needs a good sifting and vetting before most material there should be allowed to escape into the real world. If a link there turns up, only those experienced with dealing with those guys should bother clicking. And anyone who isn't a total newb should know that.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 05 2017, @02:58AM
It's clear that you didn't actually click a single one of the links.
...but you did give your uninformed opinion of what those pages said, assuming that I had quoted them in full.
Nitwit.
you give off a dangerous loon vibe
Keep posting. You're good for a laugh now and then.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 5, Interesting) by crafoo on Wednesday October 04 2017, @01:53PM (2 children)
We need a free internet. Free from filtering. Free from DMCA. Free from politically-motivated "curation". Everyone needs to see the raw internet from time to time so that they understand the sea of piss that google, microsoft, yahoo, etc. are indexing and pulling their information from. We would have much less misplaced trust and false sense of (non-existent) editing and verification of facts. None of this is happening. Don't hide the raw internet. Show it. People's expectations need to be properly calibrated to reality. Showing them little peaks into the chans is a good thing.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Wednesday October 04 2017, @02:10PM
Curation could be useful. If you do it on the dark web, you make it easier to navigate, like the early days of search engines. But when Google does it like in this case, there's liability issues and bad feelings. What's important is the ability to get away with it and answer to no one. That doesn't exist as long as you respect the DMCA, libel laws, political norms, etc.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday October 04 2017, @04:42PM
The interesting question of balance is: when everybody has the option to view the free or curated internet, if the masses opt for the curated side - will the free side effectively lose its voice and influence?
People who only trust the New York Times weren't misled by the misinformation, this time (the Times is not infalliable,) but they were slow to get the news at all, too.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1) by Sulla on Wednesday October 04 2017, @02:03PM (10 children)
In all fairness 4chan has accused the same man of committing every crime in the past couple years.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Bot on Wednesday October 04 2017, @03:22PM (9 children)
I have no reason to distrust 4chan, they are pretty consistent. OTOH other news outlets leave me confused.
Before: Terrorists don't hide among asylum seekers
After: Asylum seeker stabs people shouting Allah ACK bar (I guess that's the correct spelling)
Before: Trump will not be the republican candidate
During: HRC will be president
After: President Trump says stuff
Before: WTC resist airplane collisions
After: WTC down, hit by airplane
Before: Bin Laden is our man in Afghanistan
After: Bin Laden family members allowed to escape from the USA even if all flight down
Even After: Bin Laden was behind the attack
And let us not count all the instances of
Before: Our financial situation is solid.
2 mins later: Bankrupcy
Account abandoned.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Sulla on Wednesday October 04 2017, @03:36PM (4 children)
Pretty impressive the deciet within news agencies, one of my favorite is CNN on maturnity leave. They had an article about the importance of maturnity leave, Trump said he wanted to provide more paid leave, then CNN ran an article about how paid maturnity leave hurts women.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 04 2017, @04:58PM (3 children)
I was in a restaurant yesterday and happened to see Fox news on the TV reporting on the Vegas shooting, and near the end of their segment they cut over to "Vegas shooting - opinions from China" where they interviewed a black basketball player. It just seemed so odd, a young black man shooting hoops is probably one of the least reassuring images you can show a Fox news watcher.
This particular instance could be innocent, but the psychological manipulation through the media is very very real.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 04 2017, @05:26PM
Clips or it didn't happen!
(Score: 2, Informative) by Sulla on Wednesday October 04 2017, @07:25PM (1 child)
Thanks for reminding us that everyone who watches fox is racist. It really makes your comments more valid.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 04 2017, @09:55PM
Yup. "...and by the way, for all you kids watching at home, Santa just is white." (Megyn Kelly on Fox News Channel) [youtube.com]
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 04 2017, @06:57PM
What is inconsistent is your state of mind.
When did "they" ever say terrorists don't hide behind asylum seekers? NEVER. And one guy stabbing someone proves the point? I think you're missing the point. You clearly missed the argument.
It wasn't the plane collisions that brought down the WTC. They handled the collisions very well.
You're also talking like there was one unmoving story about the election and "they" couldn't tell it consistently. You've got a warped sense of expectations.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 05 2017, @01:04AM (1 child)
If you want accurate predictions in the future, it would be wise to check with the guy who has been correct 9 times in a row: Allan Lichtman [google.com]
All of your examples are weak--easily negated by 1 instance.
Seriously, this was the best that you could do?
...and, as I've said before, if you want accuracy, STOP CONSUMING LAMESTREAM MEDIA.
They exist to sell ads to megacorporations; all else is secondary to them.
Upthread, I've included a list of news sites with high veracity.
...which Google is degrading in its search results.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Thursday October 05 2017, @05:34PM
We can only hope that Lichtman is totally infallible.
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/trump-impeachment-professor-allan-lichtman-237181 [politico.com]
When life isn't going right, go left.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday October 05 2017, @01:54AM
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 04 2017, @03:15PM
That's the problem. The most important question for news is not if it is "fresh", but if it is reliable. The "freshness" is only the second consideration.
Unfortunately the same problem affects not only Google's algorithms, but also many human-selected big media "news".
(Score: 4, Insightful) by ilsa on Wednesday October 04 2017, @05:00PM (2 children)
We are in the middle of the information age where information, including blatant lies, can be created and disseminated in the blink of an eye. That means no single news source can be considered trustworthy because everyone has their own biases. And this is ignoring sources that actually go out of their way to twist facts to an absurd degree.
The only solution is that people need to look at multiple sources if they want the facts of any given story. And when I say multiple sources, they have to be wide on the spectrum, and international if possible. You also have to evaluate the sources themselves. How often have they been wrong? How often have they demonstrably misconstrued the facts? Are they presenting facts, or are they trying to appeal to your emotions? This last one is a big red flag as to the objectivity of the source.
Anything else risks getting trapped in an echo chamber to some degree or another.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by captain normal on Wednesday October 04 2017, @09:12PM
"A lie can travel around the world while truth is still lacing it's shoes".
When life isn't going right, go left.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 05 2017, @01:32AM
With media consolidation (Thanks, Ronnie Raygun and Slick Willie), it's increasingly difficult within the realm of Lamestream Media.
Some places have -only- 1 megacorporation's "news" outlets from which to chose.
I find that places which vet the various sources then report a bit later do a better job.
(The list up in the thread contains several of my favs.)
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2, Funny) by realDonaldTrump on Wednesday October 04 2017, @10:16PM
NBC news is #FakeNews and more dishonest than even @CNN. They are a disgrace to good reporting. No wonder their news ratings are way down! The @NBCNews story has just been totally refuted by Sec. Tillerson and @VP Pence. It is #FakeNews. They should issue an apology to AMERICA! 🇺🇸