LogFAQs > #892642680

Andromicus posted...

Who knew morons would see people disputing their dumb beliefs as affirming them?

Would you actually trust facebook to use it responsibly? I would be quicker to think that a flagged post doesn't fit with their political ideology.

Instead of displaying a warning icon in the news feed, it will instead "surface fact-checked articles" and display them next to disputed stories.

Likewise I expect these fact-checked articles to have their own bias that does fit with facebook's political ideology.

Critics say social networks should face regulation if they do not tackle the spread of misinformation and propaganda.

Others say social networks shouldn't be treated so seriously nor thought of as a form of journalism. Really, who thinks of facebook as a news source?

"What Facebook is trying to do is respond to pressure that it should be treated as a publisher, rather than a platform," said Tim Luckhurst, professor of journalism at the University of Kent.

Isn't that the opposite of what people want?

"I think that argument is dead. They are a publisher, so it is not enough to offer people a menu of other related stories.

They didn't close this quote.

"We have a generation of people that are so anti-establishment and sceptical of evidence-based news, we need regulation of the type imposed on broadcasters since they first emerged."

Wait... People are anti-establishment, so the way to address that is more dictatorship over the exchange of ideas. That's going to backfire.

Also, what a dumbass.

Also, also, they misspelled skeptical in the article.
---

No locked doors, no windows barred. No more things to make my brain seem SKARD.