Mark Zuckerberg reveals his plan to solve Facebook's fake news problem

[midian182]

Despite previously downplaying the effect of Facebook's fake news stories, Mark Zuckerberg unveiled a plan over the weekend to tackle the growing problem. In a post on the social media site, the CEO outlined some of the projects designed to stop the spread of misinformation, including the use of third-party fact-checking organizations.

Zuckerberg’s announcement came the day after Barack Obama spoke out against fake news items appearing on platforms such as Facebook. “If we are not serious about facts and what’s true and what’s not, if we can’t discriminate between serious arguments and propaganda, then we have problems," the President said during a news conference in Germany.

Earlier this month, Zuckerberg said the idea that Facebook’s fake news items influenced the US elections was “crazy,” and that it took a “profound lack of empathy” to conclude someone voted the way they did based on an untrue social media story.

In Saturday’s Facebook post, Zuckerberg seemed to backtrack on these comments.

The bottom line is: we take misinformation seriously. Our goal is to connect people with the stories they find most meaningful, and we know people want accurate information. We've been working on this problem for a long time and we take this responsibility seriously. We've made significant progress, but there is more work to be done.

The CEO stressed that Facebook does not want to discourage the sharing of content or restrict accurate news items. “We do not want to be arbiters of truth ourselves, but instead rely on our community and trusted third parties,” he wrote.

To address the “relatively small” amount of misinformation on Facebook, the company is introducing better technical systems to detect fake news before people flag it themselves. It has also reached out to fact checking organizations, will make it easier to report fake items, and is exploring labeling stories that have been flagged, which will show warnings when people read or share them.

Additionally, Facebook is working with those in the news industry to understand their fact checking systems. Zuckerberg also noted that, like Google, his company now prevents fake news sites from using its ad networks to generate revenue.

There’s no timeline for when these projects will come into effect, and he stated that "some of these ideas will work well, and some will not."

It was reported last week that a group of Facebook employees had created an unofficial task force to stop fake news stories. Whether it will now become an official part of the solution is unclear.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/67116-mark-zuckerberg-reveals-plan-solve-facebook-fake-news.html

 

[Nobina]

Fake news: news that Facebook doesn't agree with.

 

[Skidmarksdeluxe]

When I read the article headline I was hoping to see "We're closing down FB for good" in the story. *Sigh* It wasn't to be.

 

[Raoul Duke]

We don't need announcements of a plan, we need to see the results of an implemented plan. As far as the thought that no one would vote based on an untrue social media story, I asked someone I know who they would vote for if we were Americans. They said Clinton. I asked why. The answer was that they had read that Trump had said something bad about Native Americans (of which they are). That was it, no idea whatsoever of any of the other problems, policies, backgrounds etc. Just read the one thing. I know that reflects badly on them (that they don't know the issues, not who they vote for), but the fact is they would go and cast a vote same as anyone else.

 

[EClyde]

The news is fake so what's the hub-bub?

 

[Das Pooch]

Those who "lost" in this election - Obama, democrats, mainstream media, FB, twitter, etc. - are all pushing this "muh fake news!" narrative, without a hint of shame or awareness of how obvious their intent is to everyone watching. This is a dangerous game they're playing, and it'll be very interesting to see how it plays out.

 

[m4a4]

So, have people moderate the news articles? Like they had before? lol

 

[davislane1]

Those who "lost" in this election - Obama, democrats, mainstream media, FB, twitter, etc. - are all pushing this "muh fake news!" narrative, without a hint of shame or awareness of how obvious their intent is to everyone watching. This is a dangerous game they're playing, and it'll be very interesting to see how it plays out.

They are going to wind up making actual fake news more persuasive than the genuine article. Their analysis of the 2016 Presidential race was wrong. It was wrong from the start, and now they're trying to pretend magic was to blame for their hilariously off the mark predictions and political analysis. The magic of fake news, cartoon frogs, and...wait for it...wait for it... Nazi klansmen.

This will provide one benefit, however. It will continue to partition the United States into distinct, easily identifiable groups. This will be of great value moving forward.

 

[Kenrick]

How do you know a news is fake or not?

Why not just make a plan for people to be smarter when using social sites and even when watching the news? I can post a three-headed mermaid having a human baby and chances are that at least two people would believe and share the news.

 

[Bigtruckseries]

US UNCUT is fake news.

 

[OutlawCecil]

Ugh this is GOOD news but people like Trump supporters will take it like gasoline on flames. They will claim Facebook is only filtering news for one candidate or the other. *rolls eyes*

 

[davislane1]

Ugh this is GOOD news but people like Trump supporters will take it like gasoline on flames. They will claim Facebook is only filtering news for one candidate or the other. *rolls eyes*

Relevant article here.

The media is trying to regain its relevance to the general public. They don't understand why "fake news" trends or why people favor it to "authentic journalism." Facebook filtering content feeds is only going to accelerate the trend they are trying to abate. It won't work because they aren't honest.

 

[lripplinger]

The "3rd parties that will be used" to "verify" if something is "fake" is a joke. These "3rd parties" are the insane SJW types who will label anything as being "fake" if it doesn't fit into their collectivist, new world order pathetic view of the world. This is just the elite trying to create censorship. Totalitarian gooberments control populations by controlling information. And people are finally waking up to this fact, as trust in the corporate controlled media is at an all time low.

 

[Makson]

Easy to see that Zuckerberg want to support Muslims to increase Facebook status improvement, and if he cares about their 'RIGHTS' he can supply accommodation for all of them.
The only 'rights' that Muslims have in the USA, Australia, and other countries are available if they abide by the laws of the country and not expect their own laws to over-rule, they have a right to work for a living, not take, take, take and give nothing. Their 'rights' do NOT have approval to threaten, to inflict abuse on the above countries' people, to dictate what clothes females wear at a beach.
Muslims do NOT have the right to dictate that Easter, Christmas, be discontinued, that we should not sell alcoholic products in a store, and if Muslim women work in a supermarket then they WILL abide by management rules and serve pork, alcohol and other products which they dislike because that IS PART OF THE JOB they are paid to do.
If there is a special checkout which does not serve the above disliked products then they should have a much lower pay.
Zuckerberg with Facebook has gone beyond the realms of common sense turning the site into a circus with politically ridiculously incorrect sawdust in the ring.
Facebook as an un-social site becomes worse every week, I am OUT of there.

 

[bandit8623]

I thought facebook was a place to express yourself how you want to. why are they censoring things?

 

[garyjminter]

We must stop corporate owners and politicians from censoring the internet and managing the news to avoid offending their sponsors, as they've successfully done with television and radio. Most income for the news media is from advertising, including billions of $ of political advertising, and the media does not want to "bite the hand that feeds it." So we are not given true investigative reporting anymore, not given the truth about corporate or political scandals concerning money or finance, only gossip, sex scandals, sports, trivial news about candidates' wardrobes and families. The corporate owners of, and advertisers on the mass media don't want to tell us how we've been suckered by the wealthy families who own most of the stocks, bonds, cash, land and other assets in the USA and the world, while we "po' folks" do all the work and pay most of the taxes. Why not tax real estate, stocks, bonds, cash deposits, and luxury items rather than the income of hard-working people? Why are "capital gains" taxed at a lower rate than "earned income"? Why is the so-called "Earned Income Tax Credit" so low as not to be worth the cost of filing a tax return?

 

[commanderasus]

Facebook is "the world's most comprehensive database about people, their relationships, their names, their addresses, their locations, their communications with each other, and their relatives, all sitting within the United States, all accessible to U.S. Intelligence." Julian Assange

 

[Phr3d]

I'll hazard a WAGer here, and suppose that Zuckerberg was shown just TWO 'headlines' from seemingly reputable sites that 'went viral' in hours and lived for days. When it's painfully obvious to Both viewpoints how rapidly purposeful lies can become a valid topic of conversation, it might be best for Both sides to examine headlines as they occur.

That is how the AP (Associated Press) was invented, that several Opposing viewpoints examine a news story and agree that it is accurate and mostly 'unflavored'. You'll note that this is one of the most attacked organizations by certain viewpoints, as alt-alt-left and alt-alt-right have predispositions -by definition- and are regularly ignored in any news organization that values its impartiality.
Ask Dan Rather what happens when you drift into Flavored journalism.
Yes, friends, checks and balances do occur throughout journalism.. and some pay attention to who is 'unbiased'..

As has been posted so many times here: snopes "headline or rumor here" in your search window is your friend..
it takes So Little time..

 

[cliffordcooley]

How do you know a news is fake or not?

If it is "News", then it went before an editorial staff making it fake as the editorial staff wants it promoted/sold.