Facebook Adds Warning Label Over "Fake" Stories, Eventually

[engine]

Recode has noted that a fake story on Facebook took a few days before Facebook marked it with a "disputed" label.
Now, we all know how quickly news circulates on Facebook, so a even a few hours can make a difference. If that's the case, imagine the damage that could be done.
Interestingly, the article in question was a complete fake as it came from a satire site.

[recode.net...]

[tangor]

Chuckles. Satire is, by definition, "not news" of any kind. Why satire should be "disputed" is a wonder.

[keyplyr]

Why satire should be "disputed" is a wonder.

Satire has been repackaged to appear to be news & presented as such.

[tangor]

Only when gullible journos fail to read the site/source completely! That's when it becomes fake news---when it is repackaged! That's the site that needs to be flagged "disputed".

First site (satire) merely pulled a leg. Second site (repackaged as fake news) peed on leg and insists it is raining.

What's really happening is FB is remaining a platform and relying on "fact checker partners" to provide the flags ... thus the length of time between posting and the flag appearing ... and I think it takes at least two of the fact checkers to provide the flag notice before FB actually applies it (read that somewhere, just can't remember where at the moment).

[keyplyr]

Only when gullible journos fail to read the site/source completely!

Well, that's the entire argument. People *don't* investigate what is real & what is fake or satire. They are only affected by the impact of the headline, and there is tremendous power in that, especially if your motive is to affect people's beliefs.

[tangor]

And who is going to educate those "people" to do their homework? At some point the "inmates" have to be held accountable for stupidity, else they'll be running the asylum!

This mountain is a molehill, created out of whole cloth, but has had a very serious effect on the nature and veracity of the web in general and that CAN and DOES hurt all of us in the business.

Once censorship OF ANY KIND gets started that industry is DOOMED. FB is doing us no favors, and they are doing it for politics, not to save the idiots from themselves.

However, the OP remarked at the length of time between the post and the eventual flag and that's because FB is really hoping to stay out of it AS A PLATFORM (to avoid any undesired regulation or change of class ... think FCC, FEC, TITLE II, etc) and blames the delay on their "partners" ... the fact checkers. Those fact checkers, on the other hand, are an entirely different problem .... instead of "disputed" the flag should read "satire".

[keyplyr]

You're preaching to the choir here tangor, I agree with you. However the problem exists. IMO FB is pandering to both sides: 1. by not taking any meaningful action, and 2. by taking any action at all.

[tangor]

Preaching not intended, recognizing (ahem) the bs motivating these changes is essential and, in a world of fake news NOW (not then), is necessary 24/7. Right now we have GOVERNMENTS looking at "fake news" and that's a potential disaster of infinite magnitudes. We can't let this kind of censorship pass, period. It will come back to bite ALL of us if the "fight" is not done now. EVERY WEBSITE OUT THERE is subject to this kind of draconian "flagging" and, mark my words, might filter down to mom and pop ecom sites, hobby sites, or even local "news" and "entertainment".

There is a very real and present danger in the making, and if FB, G, B or the other top levels are allowed to pick and chose what is real or fake.... well, that will be a different world than what we have known. And our future business and pocketbooks will feel that pain.

[engine]

I'm sure that part of the problem lies with "the people" for believing everything they read as being truthful, accurate, and, because it's on their go-to resource it becomes an authority.
The education should come down to teaching people to do their own research to believe what they see as being factually correct.