1. TechSpot is dedicated to computer enthusiasts and power users. Ask a question and give support. Join the community here.
    TechSpot is dedicated to computer enthusiasts and power users.
    Ask a question and give support.
    Join the community here, it only takes a minute.
    Dismiss Notice

Snopes pulls out of fact-checking partnership with Facebook

By Bubbajim · 14 replies
Feb 2, 2019
Post New Reply
  1. Since the 2016 US Presidential election, Facebook has faced numerous accusations of helping spread misinformation and ‘fake news’. In December 2016 they announced their plans to address hoaxes and fake news, and one part of that strategy involved using third-party fact-checking organizations to help them combat the spread of dodgy claims and shady articles. One such organization was Snopes, which has now said in a statement that it is ending its partnership with Facebook.

    Citing concerns around costs, David Mikkelson, founder of the site, said that Snopes wants to ‘determine with certainty that our efforts to aid any particular platform are a net positive for our online community, publication and staff.’

    Reporting on the news, Poynter, who run PolitiFact and the International Fact-Checking Network, said that one major concern was that the process was overly laborious as ‘fact-checkers have to manually enter each false report they flag into a dashboard’ rather than being able to simply mark posts or report whole websites.

    Users of Facebook will still see the occasional notice of ‘Disputed by 3rd Party Fact-Checkers’ when sharing an article, as Snopes’ departure doesn’t affect the rest of the program. Indeed, Snopes even said they “have not ruled out working with Facebook or any other platform in the future”, which could mean they re-join the partnership when time and money constraints are less of an issue.

    While the news will be a minor blow to Facebook and its campaign to regain public trust, Snopes’ departure is unlikely to have much of an impact. In spite of more major controversies like the Cambridge Analytica debacle last year, earlier this week we reported that Facebook’s profit for Q4 2018 was a record $6.9 billion.

    Permalink to story.

  2. Uncle Al

    Uncle Al TS Evangelist Posts: 5,397   +3,783

    LOL ..... another nail in the coffin of Fakebook ......
  3. khha4113

    khha4113 TS Rookie Posts: 17

    Snopes is not better than FB!
    loki1944 likes this.
  4. m4a4

    m4a4 TS Evangelist Posts: 1,460   +1,035

    I mean, Snopes can be good for non-political fact checking. But otherwise, ha! not even worth my time.

    And FB should never have tried to limit human stupidity so much in the first place. People that want to share [fake] news will still find a way in the interconnected age...
  5. loki1944

    loki1944 TS Addict Posts: 156   +92

    That way they can lie independently.
    psycros, Misagt and JaredTheDragon like this.
  6. Misagt

    Misagt TS Maniac Posts: 288   +206

    This is the pot calling the kettle black.
    JaredTheDragon likes this.
  7. psycros

    psycros TS Evangelist Posts: 2,717   +2,517

    Every one of these so-called fact checking services that the MSM likes to quote were started by the same elite circle of liberal activists. It actually takes very little research to figure this out.
    JaredTheDragon likes this.
  8. cliffordcooley

    cliffordcooley TS Guardian Fighter Posts: 11,402   +5,021

    Sources within a closed door policy will always feed both sides to create confusion. It is part of their strategy to prevent being undermined. Fake news is the only thing you are going to get from politics, until they open their doors.
  9. JaredTheDragon

    JaredTheDragon TS Guru Posts: 583   +383

    I said roughly the same thing earlier, Psycros, but the TS staff deleted or censored my comment. Same circle, no matter where you go.
  10. Lew Zealand

    Lew Zealand TS Guru Posts: 673   +575

    Are you implying that conservatives don’t do fact checking on anybody? Which sites are run by conservatives?
  11. JaredTheDragon

    JaredTheDragon TS Guru Posts: 583   +383

    No. I wasn't implying anything of the sort, nor am I a "conservative". Any more questions? I'll be here all week.
  12. Lew Zealand

    Lew Zealand TS Guru Posts: 673   +575

    Ah, I interpreted "elite circle of liberal activists" as an accusation of bias towards those fact checking sites and was wondering if there were any similar sites with less/no/opposing bias.
  13. JaredTheDragon

    JaredTheDragon TS Guru Posts: 583   +383

    There are no major news sites without bias. All mainstream media has been subverted since the 1950s, if not before. That doesn't mean there aren't shreds of fact and truth to be found, but there is always a spin and tons of fakery in any major media source. Washington Post for example has an admitted $800M contract with Langley directly, but every other paper or site is also their tool. This site is no different, painted obvious by their censorship and extensive coverage of other Langley projects such as SpaceX or Apple. You will find plenty with opposing bias of course, because both sides are a manufactured controversy. Conservatives are just as dumb as liberals and most people will believe anything.
  14. Lew Zealand

    Lew Zealand TS Guru Posts: 673   +575

    Too complicated. Slow "news" day? Put Apple or Musk in a headline. Ad dollars start rolling in from the fanboys and haters.

    And everyone and their mom has a fat contract with AWS because they're cheaper. That doesn't make everyone their stooge. Again, too complicated.
  15. JaredTheDragon

    JaredTheDragon TS Guru Posts: 583   +383

    Well I'm sorry it sounded too complicated. I really tried to break it down and simplify it for you, but if you're still having trouble parsing the concepts just look up the Church Committee Hearings in the 1970s. It's not conspiracy theory, it's Congressional Record. Perhaps it was before your time.

    Out of curiosity, where did Amazon come into this discussion? We were talking about the media and Langley, not some e-store and their adbots. Since SpaceX and Apple and all the major tech companies are owned by the same people that own Langley's boys-in-black, we see them over and over in the media not because it sells ads, but because they pay sites like this directly to promote their toy projects. If your assessment were correct they would be pushing things that actually sell, not SpaceX or Tesla. We'd see articles about Tide Pods being superior tech to Downy or whatever instead of rants about Elan Mask's latest screw-up publicity stunts.

Add your comment to this article

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...