Facebook's Fake News Dilemma: The Question of Gatekeepers

Facebook's resistance to filtering news on its own is understandable. After all, the creation of Gatekeepers (editors/an editorial staff for media articles) will put them in a new ring - and with their profits driven by Facebook advertising and post-boosting, it doesn't make sense for them to antagonize their paying users.

But the problem of whether or not a gatekeeper system will be abused is a moot point, because Facebook as it is right now is being abused, whether they like to admit it or not. It's easy to say, though, that perhaps news outlets themselves should form up their own vetting committees. But they won't do that, either. And they won't do it for similar reasons as Facebook's.

And so we inch deeper into a post-truth world.

Article: http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/12/2/13812818/facebook-fake-news-think-before-you-share

Curation as the answer to fake news

While I do have some concerns about exactly how Facebook will determine who is a confirmed source, I think this simply points out the need for curation in today's info-overload world.

"Sources tell Business Insider that the new feature, called Collections, will serve up stories and media from sources chosen by Facebook. The social media titan has been courting entertainment and media companies in the last few weeks to create content for the new section. Early partners have been told that their created content will be inserted directly into users' News Feed, giving it a much broader reach."

https://www.engadget.com/2016/12/02/facebook-could-fight-fake-news-with-curated-articles/

Facebook and Fake News, Part 2

Interesting quote (with links):

Given the renewed post-election scrutiny of Facebook’s persistently troubled relationship with news sharing, these moves are good PR. But they also represent steps away from the site’s insistence that it’s a platform, not a media company—a stance that protects it from regulation or prosecution for content shared by users.

http://time.com/4577809/mark-zuckerberg-fake-news-controls-facebook/

Facebook and Fake News

The latest Zuckerberg dilemma:

"We take misinformation seriously," writes Zuckerberg. "We've been working on this problem for a long time and we take this responsibility seriously. We've made significant progress, but there is more work to be done."
"We believe in giving people a voice, which means erring on the side of letting people share what they want whenever possible," he adds. "We need to be careful not to discourage sharing of opinions or mistakenly restricting accurate content."

I don't envy his situation, but really, at some point, you just have to draw the line. My personal stand is, once they do roll out their rules, they better have proper enforcement and very, very clear guidelines.

http://www.techradar.com/news/mark-zuckerberg-has-a-plan-to-banish-fake-news-from-facebook

The New/Old Poison: The Misleading Pen

Much ado has been said about fake news websites. Perhaps, rather than all of us getting into a snit over fake news sites, perhaps it's time to institute changes for the better.

http://gizmodo.com/fake-news-stories-outperformed-real-ones-on-facebook-in-1789067158

https://www.buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman/viral-fake-election-news-outperformed-real-news-on-facebookHere is a graphic that illustrates the disturbing reach of fake news:

Facebook Addresses Fake News Websites Where It Hurts

As with Google, it seems that Facebook will now penalize fake news sites by denying them advertising dollars.

http://time.com/4570923/google-facebook-fake-news-websites-advertising-revenue/

Photo from http://www.picserver.org/a/advertising.html