There are some shady sites out there that peddle totally fake news for ad impressions. I'm fine with disrupting their business model.

But what are the odds that legitimate (or even fringe, semi-legitimate) right-wing news sites bear the brunt of this movement?

In my community, I could see the opposite happening. Anti-vax marked as true, scientific articles marked as fake.

I think they at least deserve a chance to try to get it right.

There's a long series of experiments on a phenomenon called "the hostile media effect."

Basically if you show two opposing interest groups the same film clip, both will rate it as highly inaccurate and biased against their point of view.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_media_effect

I'm excited for the results of Facebook's experiment, but fully expect this to remain an unsolved problem for the foreseeable future.

Yes Facebook did add that feature... last year. Engadget is simply reporting on something Facebook announced they added publicly last year. https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2015/01/news-feed-fyi-showing-f...

What proportion of users do you think were aware of it?

And, if left to users, considering we have the type of users who believe in a #BoycottStarwars movement, would you really want to leave this feature in the hands of said users?

Because everyone knows Facebook users are the epitome of fact curation.

Stable door: closed. Horse: bolted.

With great power comes great responsibility.