Wait, you're all Facebook friends?

 

* Cries inconsolably

so much for:

 

thou shalt not lie.....

 

Wait, you're all Facebook friends?

* Cries inconsolably

 

Not ALL of us.....

 

I'm pretty easy to know my real name, if anyone is interested....I'm not the Mike Sixel that is the MMA fighter, btw....

 

Wait, you're all Facebook friends?

* Cries inconsolably

 

All of Twinsdaily is part of the "No Smerfs" club.  Just to put salt in the ol' wound....

 

All of Twinsdaily is part of the "No Smerfs" club.  Just to put salt in the ol' wound....

Great.... Now he's going to search for our FB group after you gave him the name! 

I was on the byto Facebook group!

 

* Cries even harder

Hey, I wasn't in that group, so what's that tell ya?

There is a FB group?

 

Hey, I wasn't in that group, so what's that tell ya?

Brock deleted it after I took it rogue.

 

I was on the byto Facebook group!

* Cries even harder

 

That needs to still be a thing.  Some of you hacks I still have friended with that, but I barely know who is who anymore.

We're seeing an example of this playing out on this very site right now. People don't care about facts, as long as there is an opportunity to visit la-la land.

 

We're seeing an example of this playing out on this very site right now. People don't care about facts, as long as there is an opportunity to visit la-la land.

It's not fake news though....what is this, the 4th thread you have brought this up in now?
Geez dude, get a life!

 

We're seeing an example of this playing out on this very site right now. People don't care about facts, as long as there is an opportunity to visit la-la land.

We aren't actually seeing an example of this playing out. Nobody has considered Dave credible enough to start re-publishing this info. Nobody has made FB memes celebrating the trade. Nobody is referring to the trade in past tense as it has already happened. If anything this site has shown great resistance to blindly believing less than credible news.

The problem isn't "fake news" per se -- that has always existed.

 

What went wrong is the pay-per-click advertising model used by Google and Facebook.  Displaying news stories written by the highest bidder was bound to be exploited at some point and we should have all seen this one coming.

 

Google and Facebook have been mum on the subject, as they are probably rather happy about all the cash they earned during this election season.  However, at some point as a nation we need to hold their feet to the fire on this one.  As we bicker about "fake news" we continue to miss the point as to what really happened.  PPC advertising is going to break this country unless we regulate it.  It may have already broken the country.

PPC has become a security issue as it is exploitable by foreign entities.  This is a major problem.  

Edited December 8, 20169 yr by Doomtints

Google hasn't really stayed mum on the subject though, they already came out and said they are blacklisting fake news sites from google ad words etc, the problem is new ones pop up all the time, so it's really a game of cat and mouse, however they are actually working on the problem, which is good.

Facebook though.....different story. Zuckerberg is a terrible CEO and needs to step down.

 

The problem isn't "fake news" per se -- that has always existed.

 

What went wrong is the pay-per-click advertising model used by Google and Facebook.  Displaying news stories written by the highest bidder was bound to be exploited at some point and we should have all seen this one coming.

 

Google and Facebook have been mum on the subject, as they are probably rather happy about all the cash they earned during this election season.  However, at some point as a nation we need to hold their feet to the fire on this one.  As we bicker about "fake news" we continue to miss the point as to what really happened.  PPC advertising is going to break this country unless we regulate it.  It may have already broken the country.

PPC has become a security issue as it is exploitable by foreign entities.  This is a major problem.  

 

You think it's brought bad things to your site advertising, imagine what the same sort of payment system has done for writing legitimacy online in all areas of life. You get paid by the click, you write click-bait...

The problem isn't actually fake news, the problem is a gullible populace, lacking critical thinking skills. And that has a lot more widespread effect than some bad new sites do.

Edited December 9, 20169 yr by Craig Arko

 

The problem isn't "fake news" per se -- that has always existed.

 

 

The problem isn't actually fake news, the problem is a gullible populace, lacking critical thinking skills.

 

Sure, it's always existed -- but to anywhere near this extent?

 

I mean, it costs virtually nothing to set up a site like abcnews.com.co and completely copy the actual ABC News web site.  At that point you can insert or modify whatever you want and start promoting it.

 

Sure, in previous eras you could print a fake newspaper, but that was infinitely harder, a much higher barrier of entry to the fake news game.

Sure, it's always existed -- but to anywhere near this extent?

 

I mean, it costs virtually nothing to set up a site like abcnews.com.co and completely copy the actual ABC News web site.  At that point you can insert or modify whatever you want and start promoting it.

 

Sure, in previous eras you could print a fake newspaper, but that was infinitely harder, a much higher barrier of entry to the fake news game.

Still gotta have somebody to fall for it.

 

Sure, it's always existed -- but to anywhere near this extent?

 

I mean, it costs virtually nothing to set up a site like abcnews.com.co and completely copy the actual ABC News web site.  At that point you can insert or modify whatever you want and start promoting it.

 

Sure, in previous eras you could print a fake newspaper, but that was infinitely harder, a much higher barrier of entry to the fake news game.

 

The problem is an unregulated pay per click content model on facebook.  Propaganda peddlers out-bid legitimate news sources, so the fake stuff got displayed and the legit stuff did not.

 

This is less pronounced on Google, etc., as Google is known to be showing "ads."  Facebook presents the content as something else.  

Newspapers would be shredded by the government if they displayed news stories written by the highest bidder.  Same with television news broadcasters.

As a country we should have seen this coming.  It should have been obvious.  But somehow it wasn't.  We can't regulate liars and we can't change the brains of people susceptible to propaganda, so instead we must work to regulate pay per click advertising on the WWW and particularly on sites such as facebook.  *Every* paid link on facebook needs to be marked as a "Paid advertisement" and NOT news ... and that's just the start.

Edited December 12, 20169 yr by Doomtints

 

Still gotta have somebody to fall for it.

Yes, but that hasn't changed.  What changed was how easy it is to play the game, making those people far easier to reach.

 

I'm all for education, critical thinking skills, and what-not, but that's more of a utopian dream right now than a practical countermeasure to the problem today.

Yes, but that hasn't changed.  What changed was how easy it is to play the game, making those people far easier to reach.

 

I'm all for education, critical thinking skills, and what-not, but that's more of a utopian dream right now than a practical countermeasure to the problem today.

So what do you think needs to be done?

 

The problem is an unregulated pay per click content model on facebook.  Propaganda peddlers out-bid legitimate news sources, so the fake stuff got displayed and the legit stuff did not.

 

This is less pronounced on Google, etc., as Google is known to be showing "ads."  Facebook presents the content as something else.

 

Paid content on Facebook is indeed labeled as an ad or sponsored content.

 

The problem is that fake news can still generated likes, shares, and get into the coveted "trending" topics area.  Which gets clicks out to the fake news site, where the fake news proprietor can generate ad revenue however he/she likes.

 

It is a step forward to prevent them from using Google or Facebook ad networks, but I suspect there are still a lot of ad networks for these fake news sites to use.  At that point, they are not using Google or Facebook for direct revenue, rather for simple "grassroots" promotion.

 

So what do you think needs to be done?

Doomtints is on a good track, removing some revenue incentives for fake news sites.

 

But I suspect it will be up to Google and Facebook to more efficiently detect fake news, so they can avoid helping to promote it.

 

Grassroots, crowd-sourced information sounds good in theory, but masses of gullible folks liking and sharing a "news story" can't be the chief determinator of whether Google or Facebook promotes that "news story" to a wider audience.

 

I know that sounds like "censorship" or having Google and Facebook act as "gatekeepers" -- but for example, "Pizzagate" shouldn't "trend" or be a top result anywhere unless it's specifically an article clearing stating that Pizzagate is BS.

 

Google hasn't really stayed mum on the subject though, they already came out and said they are blacklisting fake news sites from google ad words etc, the problem is new ones pop up all the time, so it's really a game of cat and mouse, however they are actually working on the problem, which is good.

Facebook though.....different story. Zuckerberg is a terrible CEO and needs to step down.

Sounds like Facebook took the same ad network steps as Google did recently:

 

http://fortune.com/2016/11/15/facebook-google-policy-ads-fake-news/

Still gotta have somebody to fall for it.

 

_{^{/ One Trick Pony has one trick}}

 

fake2.jpg

 

_{^{/ One Trick Pony has one trick}}

See? Even ABC News is saying it!

A perspective from the ACLU.

 

https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-future/fixing-fake-news

 

The problem isn't actually fake news, the problem is a gullible populace, lacking critical thinking skills. And that has a lot more widespread effect than some bad new sites do.

 

Yes, but plenty of people with critical thinking skills can fall for this crap too. It's really not that hard to concoct something. It just needs to be something that falls into that unquestioned world view, which we all carry to some extent or another. It's easy to say it's a gullible population. To some extent, that's very true. What's harder is admitting that we are all gullible in some way shape or form because we all have assumptions that we hold as undeniable fact. This is a lot like unconscious bias.

 

The real problem in my opinion is assumptions, labeling, and finally a complete inability to listen and try and understand. Labeling an opponent often fits with our own assumptions. It's also something that in my observation pretty much guarantees that the person doing the labeling has no intention of listening. One can never find the truth if all we do is label our adversaries and never listen to what they have to say. That has little to do with critical thinking and a whole lot more to do with respect for others along with the admission that I could **gasp** possibly be wrong.  And we all know that no one is wrong on the internet.

 

 

 

Yes, but plenty of people with critical thinking skills can fall for this crap too. It's really not that hard to concoct something. It just needs to be something that falls into that unquestioned world view, which we all carry to some extent or another. It's easy to say it's a gullible population. To some extent, that's very true. What's harder is admitting that we are all gullible in some way shape or form because we all have assumptions that we hold as undeniable fact. This is a lot like unconscious bias.

 

The real problem in my opinion is assumptions, labeling, and finally a complete inability to listen and try and understand. Labeling an opponent often fits with our own assumptions. It's also something that in my observation pretty much guarantees that the person doing the labeling has no intention of listening. One can never find the truth if all we do is label our adversaries and never listen to what they have to say. That has little to do with critical thinking and a whole lot more to do with respect for others along with the admission that I could **gasp** possibly be wrong.  And we all know that no one is wrong on the internet.

 

I wouldn't like to admit it, but if a fake news story said that Ted Cruz and Rick Santorum were running an underground child sex slave business out of the basement of a pizza joint, there would be plenty of people who would believe that too.

 

http://i.imgur.com/2OggKej.jpg