Re:Facebook is 1-2% responsible for the election?
by narrator on Tuesday November 15, 2016 @01:55PM
(#12961031)
/r/politics is a really bad example because it was completely taken over by pro-Hillary sentiment during the campaign. Then it all flipped back to neutral after the campaign.
Re:Facebook is 1-2% responsible for the election?
by belltaco on Tuesday November 15, 2016 @03:01PM
(#12961633)
It didn't really flip back to neutral. Go read the recent top poss.
Re:Facebook is 1-2% responsible for the election?
by nathancahill on Tuesday November 15, 2016 @03:52PM
(#12962102)
It's a perfect example. Bias != Fake. Bias is fine. People are always going to share articles biased towards their views.
Re:Facebook is 1-2% responsible for the election?
by bjt2n3904 on Tuesday November 15, 2016 @01:28PM
(#12960749)
Sure, misleading title. We should also probably weight the score a little heavier so misleading news doesn't percolate to the top of people's news feeds. It's not filtering, it's just curating!
Weren't we angry at Facebook just a few months ago for doing just that?
Who gets to decide what's "relevant"? What's "misleading"?
Many of my friends sincerely believe the fake news they have read on these sites, because nothing suggests that it might be fake. It's so sad. When I ask them for sources for "facts" like "Obama is a Muslim", they send me a list of news articles that "proves it". Fact checking sites are "the corrupt media" and "liberal bias".
btw, these aren't uninformed people. They watch the news, debate with friends and vote. It's the sincerity that they believe the news with that's so depressing.