Spread the love! TechSpot Tech Gift Shortlist 2017

Yale study says labeling Facebook's fake news stories isn't helping

By midian182 ยท 17 replies
Sep 14, 2017
Post New Reply
  1. Ever since CEO Mark Zuckerberg was forced to deny its fake news stories influence the US election, the social network has implemented several features to tackle the problem. Earlier this year, it introduced a function that let users tag bogus items to stop them spreading, but a new report says this simply isn’t working.

    If enough people report a Facebook article as fake, it may be reviewed by independent fact checkers, such as Snopes and Politifact. If it is then determined to be factually incorrect, a “disputed by third-party fact checkers” label will appear at the bottom of the post.

    Facebook hoped that users would be less likely to believe and share ‘disputed’ articles, but a study from Yale claims this is rarely the case. It says that the label has “only a very modest impact on people’s perceptions.”

    The study, which will be submitted for peer review, asked 7534 people to judge the accuracy of 24 headlines, 12 true and 12 false. It found that those articles with the disputed tag made participants just 3.7 percent more likely to correctly identify them as false.

    “The main potential benefit of the tag is that it (slightly) increased belief in real news headlines,” the researchers said. “This seems insufficient, however, to stem the tide of false and misleading information circulating on social media.”

    It was also discovered that the flagging feature is causing more people to believe fake news stories. With so many of the posts appearing on Facebook, it’s impossible for the fact-checkers to address them all. This leads to a “backfire effect” where users see all untagged fake news stories as likely to be real. The researchers say this is especially true among Trump supporters and adults under 26.

    Facebook said the flagging system was just one element of its battle against fake news. Regarding the Yale report, a spokesperson said it was an “opt-in study of people being paid to respond to survey questions. It is not real data from people using Facebook.”

    Facebook recently announced more new measures to stop fake news appearing on the platform, including preventing ads from appearing on offensive and false content.

    Permalink to story.

     
  2. davislane1

    davislane1 TS Grand Inquisitor Posts: 4,731   +3,749

    It took a Yale study to determine exactly what we predicted when the feature first rolled out?
     
  3. MoeJoe

    MoeJoe TS Guru Posts: 701   +377

    L M A O
     
  4. wiyosaya

    wiyosaya TS Evangelist Posts: 1,737   +643

    Move along. Nothing no news here!

    Some scientists just have to prove the obvious because it is how they make their living! LOL
     
    Reehahs and davislane1 like this.
  5. psycros

    psycros TS Evangelist Posts: 1,799   +1,211

    "If enough people report a Facebook article as fake, it may be reviewed by independent fact checkers, such as Snopes and Politifact."

    Which means nothing, since both are wholly owned subsidiaries of one political party. The might as well be using Media Matters for their "fact-checking".

    In high school I became an avid news junkie. After a decade or so I realized that at least 50% of what I was seeing in the mass media was spin. Now I realize its more like 90%, with the other 10% being completely fabricated. The top execs of the biggest American news outlets all have close personal ties to party leadership, with the overwhelming majority being in bed (often literally) with Democrats. I hardly ever watch the news anymore because I know that I'm being fed an agenda. Is it any wonder the polls tell us that people are increasingly looking to social media to stay informed? They don't trust the professional liars on cable any more. Naturally, the new battleground of spin is Facebook, where there's little to no fact-checking. But you have to wonder which is worse - lies coming from some nobody on the Internet or from the NBC news desk.
     
    Misagt, Reehahs and JaredTheDragon like this.
  6. Theinsanegamer

    Theinsanegamer TS Evangelist Posts: 813   +808

    Only the mentally empty get their news from facebook anyway. Its just a platform full of yuppies wasting their lives trying to virtually one-up another and get outraged at stupid things.
     
    wiyosaya and Nobina like this.
  7. axiomatic13

    axiomatic13 TS Addict Posts: 138   +67

    So I mash the button on FB to mark an article as "fake" but I have never EVER seen an article marked as "disputed." To me that says.... I'm the only person so far who has bothered to fact check the racist bullshit my ancient Neandertal high school friend has posted today. NOT GOOD ENOUGH FACEBOOK! There are many databases of fake news URL's. I want to see Facebook start just by blocking those. What is their reticence in doing whats is simple to do? Free speech?
     
  8. JaredTheDragon

    JaredTheDragon TS Booster Posts: 172   +85

    Amazing that Langley's own social media site is pretending to quash fake news - which is all made up by them, anyway. Zucky is such a tool. He's nearly as fake as that Elan Mask guy.
     
  9. Nobina

    Nobina TS Evangelist Posts: 1,270   +770

    Next thing they will tell us people who get news from facebook are *****s.
     
  10. Reehahs

    Reehahs TS Guru Posts: 518   +280

    If news was factual only then you would need only one source and it would be boring.
     
  11. Squid Surprise

    Squid Surprise TS Evangelist Posts: 1,482   +657

    Here's the logical flaw... the same morons who can't tell if an article is fake EVEN IF IT IS FLAGGED AS DISPUTED are the SAME PEOPLE who are being relied on to flag the articles as fake in the first place!!

    What a surprise.... it doesn't work!
     
  12. wiyosaya

    wiyosaya TS Evangelist Posts: 1,737   +643

    How about the lies that come from other sources such as Fox News? Surely, they spin as much as NBC. "News" is all about ratings these days, and if any "news outlet" is chasing ratings, then there has to be an element that is at least spin or worse.

    I used to pay more attention to "news" but these days, I pay very little attention to what is being marketed as news.

    Honestly, if I had a Facebook account, I highly doubt that I would place much faith in the validity of any item posted there as "news."

    Opps! Here come the flames!
     
  13. MilwaukeeMike

    MilwaukeeMike TS Evangelist Posts: 2,875   +1,206

    Not flames - juts minor corrections... The news doesn't show outright lies. They just show the news that supports what they want, and they show stuff that isn't really news, but still supports what they want. The CBS evening news is a good example.

    They usually have a Trump bashing story on.. I remember one where his daughter was talking to some people in Germany and she said something about Trump supporting woman and someone in the audience groaned. This made the news... CBS put it on the national evening news and they said 'The audience member probably groaned because Trump has had a hard time convincing women he supports them after this video came out' - and then they showed that video from 10 years ago with Trump's 'locker room talk' where he was demeaning women.

    Is any of that a lie? No - they didn't spin anything and they didn't make up anything. All they did was blatantly push their anti-trump agenda at even possible turn. And so what if a woman in Germany groaning at Evanka Trump isn't really national news.... it gets their point across. Last night the CBS evening news had a story about some senator who was still angry about what Trump said about Charlottesville. It's all true, but it's not news.

    Fox does this too of course it just seems weirder when they do it because there's only 2 major news outlets in the country who don't hate Trump (the other being the WSJ - who only disagrees with him, they don't hate him).

    Fake news is stuff that's completely utterly false - like that story about Hillary punching that guy in the face that one time (I'm making this up of course).
     
  14. TheBigFatClown

    TheBigFatClown TS Guru Posts: 679   +251

    You conflated the word "lies" with the word "spin" in your first 2 sentences. They are different. You also seem to imply that "all" news organizations will do or say anything to become popular or get high ratings even put out fake news. Everybody wants high ratings but that doesn't mean you have to lie to boost your ratings. I think the news organizations that feel a need to lie due so at their own peril as a direct response to poor ratings to begin with. And it becomes a vicious cycle which is self-defeating. Fox News has been the highest rated news network for an awfully large number of consecutive years and yet you chose to single them out as though they were the most deceitful of the bunch? I guess they're the #1 rated news organization for the past XX number of years because, they tell the most lies?

    Please post some lies they have told, that is actual false statements that they presented as facts. And remember when you do this, that the words "lie" and "spin" have 2 different meanings.

    Here's a link to a video I'm guessing you haven't seen yet:



    You might take a look.
     
    Last edited: Sep 14, 2017
  15. commanderasus

    commanderasus TS Booster Posts: 171   +64

    The real question here is how much "fake information" has Yale taught over the years?
     
  16. Bubbajim

    Bubbajim TS Maniac Posts: 225   +150

    ...or even if an outcome is intuitive, doesn't mean it necessarily is the end result. They checked the facts to verify whether the intuition was right or not. How dare they.
     
  17. Bubbajim

    Bubbajim TS Maniac Posts: 225   +150

    Just cross-reference news stories across a couple of websites and you'll likely be able to spot the spin and work out the reality for yourself.

    The worse thing than editorial spin, in my opinion, is what doesn't even get reported in the first place. The agenda-setting of the media is a worse problem than the spin we've all known about for years.
     
  18. commanderasus

    commanderasus TS Booster Posts: 171   +64

    Mark Zuckerberg is a Cyberdyne System Model Mark 1 and is not HUMAN. This model has been recalled but is not responding to commands from Cyberdyne Central Command. We dispatched Cyberdyne Model Hillary 2015 to correct this model but it too has malfunctioned. We then sent Terminator Trump 2016 to eliminate both of these models, then we received a message from one of our suppliers: "The Orange Wires used in your model Trump 2016 for hair are not designed to process more than one command at a time, we suggest that you recall this model as soon as possible. It can not be controlled especially if it consumes junk food.
     

Similar Topics

Add New Comment

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