I have no clue why anyone takes this seriously or is concerned about this. I have seen maybe three fact-checks during my lifetime on Facebook. That was a long long time ago. I disagreed with two of them and I am not sure if the third one said anything interesting.
Is there a population somewhere I am not aware of, who believes everything they see on Facebook, who will now be ruined by this change?
I dont think fact checking was the main reason, moreso that they decided to allow hate speech (e.g. They’re allowing targetted hate against LGBT groups).
The anonymous fact-checking is the main thing PEOPLE took issue with. Like, oh I’m supposed to believe your anonymous fact-checkers know better than me or my trusted sources on what’s true/false, but you refuse to identify or provide the credentials of those fact-checkers, so their integrity and validity can be certified?
But it’s not the anonymous strangers arbitrarily sifting the wheat from the chaff willy nilly, and with no evidence to support their claims, that were the problem /s. , The problem was CLEARLY the people who took issue with an anonymous rando who has the power to declare a reputable source of info is lying, can not be disputed on that front (even in the many instances of them being wrong), and whose credentials can not be verified but is still supposed to be arbitrarily accepted as the supreme arbiter of reality and fiction.
Bought and paid for by a soulless corporation. I’ll take “extreme dought” for $500. I was more likely to believe in Santa Clause than an anonymous figure who had no credentials or checks and balances of any kind.
They censored certain phrases and words, which they plan on no longer enforcing. I agree that they leave hate speech on the platform (reports rarely do anything) but the looser restrictions mean people can post even more hateful content and that paves the way for discrimatory ideologies
The usual suspects of Gen Boomer and X that first preached to not believe anything on the internet and yet doing exactly that without an external fact check.
Personally for stuff I don’t really care, I will always say “Allegedly (…)” before stating something a website says. If the stuff is important (to me or a peer) I might look harder into it.
I have no clue why anyone takes this seriously or is concerned about this. I have seen maybe three fact-checks during my lifetime on Facebook. That was a long long time ago. I disagreed with two of them and I am not sure if the third one said anything interesting.
Is there a population somewhere I am not aware of, who believes everything they see on Facebook, who will now be ruined by this change?
I dont think fact checking was the main reason, moreso that they decided to allow hate speech (e.g. They’re allowing targetted hate against LGBT groups).
The anonymous fact-checking is the main thing PEOPLE took issue with. Like, oh I’m supposed to believe your anonymous fact-checkers know better than me or my trusted sources on what’s true/false, but you refuse to identify or provide the credentials of those fact-checkers, so their integrity and validity can be certified?
But it’s not the anonymous strangers arbitrarily sifting the wheat from the chaff willy nilly, and with no evidence to support their claims, that were the problem /s. , The problem was CLEARLY the people who took issue with an anonymous rando who has the power to declare a reputable source of info is lying, can not be disputed on that front (even in the many instances of them being wrong), and whose credentials can not be verified but is still supposed to be arbitrarily accepted as the supreme arbiter of reality and fiction.
Bought and paid for by a soulless corporation. I’ll take “extreme dought” for $500. I was more likely to believe in Santa Clause than an anonymous figure who had no credentials or checks and balances of any kind.
Never seen FB disallow fake news or hate speech as long as it is coming from the (extreme) right.
Either they just stop pretending now or irl somehow get even worse?
They censored certain phrases and words, which they plan on no longer enforcing. I agree that they leave hate speech on the platform (reports rarely do anything) but the looser restrictions mean people can post even more hateful content and that paves the way for discrimatory ideologies
The usual suspects of Gen Boomer and X that first preached to not believe anything on the internet and yet doing exactly that without an external fact check.
Personally for stuff I don’t really care, I will always say “Allegedly (…)” before stating something a website says. If the stuff is important (to me or a peer) I might look harder into it.