Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Buzzfeed)   Facebook reveals its new tag to identify fake news stories. What a great idea, why didn't we think of that months ago?   ( buzzfeed.com) divider line
    More: Fake, Facebook, Fact checker, initial time period, future impressions, fact-checking partners, fact checks, Facebook executive, Facebook spokesperson  
•       •       •

3269 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Oct 2017 at 3:07 PM (8 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



43 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2017-10-12 10:26:51 AM  
My conservative friends will be quitting Facebook in droves when they see that pop up on everything they like.

Perhaps they could source it better: "Secret Agent 12 at Moscow Spy Central"
 
2017-10-12 10:39:35 AM  

edmo: My conservative friends will be quitting Facebook in droves when they see that pop up on everything they like.

Perhaps they could source it better: "Secret Agent 12 at Moscow Spy Central"


What ever happened to Freedom Book or whatever it was that the Conservapedia people tried to make?
 
2017-10-12 10:57:01 AM  
Oh I am sure the responses to articles marked as fake will be calm and rational. Also, it does look like they're including links explaining why an article is fake, but I guarantee that people will holler that article is a crock.
 
2017-10-12 11:47:56 AM  
This isn't going to help.
People want to be deluded/have their biases confirmed, and will either ignore Facebook's attempts at sanity-checking, openly deride them, or go elsewhere for their BS fixes.
 
2017-10-12 03:12:00 PM  
Oh, this is going to be hilarious.
 
2017-10-12 03:12:00 PM  
This will never be abused to bury legitimate stories.

/No,  NEVER!
 
2017-10-12 03:12:06 PM  

Anastacya: Oh I am sure the responses to articles marked as fake will be calm and rational. Also, it does look like they're including links explaining why an article is fake, but I guarantee that people will holler that article is a crock.


This is cynical and bleak...so it's probably accurate.
 
2017-10-12 03:13:51 PM  
Don't Facebook and nonsense go hand in hand?
 
2017-10-12 03:15:11 PM  

Revek: This will never be abused to bury legitimate stories.


Do you have reason to believe Politifact and Snopes are likely to do that?
 
2017-10-12 03:15:12 PM  

FortyHams: edmo: My conservative friends will be quitting Facebook in droves when they see that pop up on everything they like.

Perhaps they could source it better: "Secret Agent 12 at Moscow Spy Central"

What ever happened to Freedom Book or whatever it was that the Conservapedia people tried to make?


None of their target base could figure out something as simple as TOR, much less configure a VPN and Proxy server.
 
2017-10-12 03:16:35 PM  

Mr.Tangent: Don't Facebook and nonsense go hand in hand?


Next they'll adopt the tagline "it's not news, it's Facebook"
 
2017-10-12 03:16:44 PM  
Remember, DON'T SHARE this story! COPY and PASTE to your own timeline, or Facebook will censor it!

WHY DON'T THEY WANT YOU TO KNOW THE TRUTH?
 
2017-10-12 03:17:38 PM  
Step one; trust no one.
 
2017-10-12 03:19:14 PM  
I'll join FB when they add a 
img.fark.netView Full Size
tag. No sooner.
 
2017-10-12 03:20:18 PM  

ceejayoz: Revek: This will never be abused to bury legitimate stories.

Do you have reason to believe Politifact and Snopes are likely to do that?


Last yearSnopes went out of its way to mark any bat shiat crazy conspiracy theroy about hillary as unproven, while marking any story that made trump look bad as false even when they were later proven true.
 
2017-10-12 03:25:57 PM  
Fact checkers?

img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-10-12 03:29:30 PM  

phishrace: I'll join FB when they add a [img.fark.net image 54x11] tag. No sooner.


They will use it for a few years and stop.  Unlike any other site you have ever visited.
 
2017-10-12 03:29:46 PM  

FortyHams: edmo: My conservative friends will be quitting Facebook in droves when they see that pop up on everything they like.

Perhaps they could source it better: "Secret Agent 12 at Moscow Spy Central"

What ever happened to Freedom Book or whatever it was that the Conservapedia people tried to make?


It went about as well as conservative humor.
 
2017-10-12 03:29:54 PM  

cardex: ceejayoz: Revek: This will never be abused to bury legitimate stories.

Do you have reason to believe Politifact and Snopes are likely to do that?

Last yearSnopes went out of its way to mark any bat shiat crazy conspiracy theroy about hillary as unproven, while marking any story that made trump look bad as false even when they were later proven true.


That's a hoax. I just looked that up on....

OH MY GOD!
 
2017-10-12 03:31:20 PM  

phishrace: I'll join FB when they add a [img.fark.net image 54x11] tag. No sooner.


I see something; a tag I haven't seen since...
 
2017-10-12 03:32:21 PM  
I saw a story in Facebook this morning that showed an unclothed woman in 3 frames.  In the last one she appeared to be limp and hanging out the window. It declared 'watch as naked tourist hangs out window and is killed by a lamp post.'  I had to look at the source, then verify everything a few times because I've never seen Facebook suggest a story like this before.

Then it gave me options I'd never seen before, when I reported it.  It let me tag it for violence and nudity.  I can't even find that story on Daily Mail's site.  I wonder if it was a test or a really deceptive clickbait ad.
 
2017-10-12 03:33:13 PM  

cardex: ceejayoz: Revek: This will never be abused to bury legitimate stories.

Do you have reason to believe Politifact and Snopes are likely to do that?

Last yearSnopes went out of its way to mark any bat shiat crazy conspiracy theroy about hillary as unproven, while marking any story that made trump look bad as false even when they were later proven true.


Snopes rates this as MISLEADING, and makes the case that they're biased towards everyone and everything simultaneously.
 
2017-10-12 03:33:37 PM  
Nevermind, I just found the real article now that I have time.  WTFark.
 
2017-10-12 03:36:40 PM  

phishrace: I'll join FB when they add a [img.fark.net image 54x11] tag. No sooner.


The Russian version of facebook allows boobies on it.

vk.com (front page is sfw, others might not be)
 
2017-10-12 03:44:34 PM  
Who gets their news from Facebook?
 
2017-10-12 03:47:28 PM  

boyvoyeur: Who gets their news from Facebook?


According to this Facebook article I just read, something like 110% of everybody.
 
2017-10-12 03:50:11 PM  

EdgeRunner: boyvoyeur: Who gets their news from Facebook?

According to this Facebook article I just read, something like 110% of everybody.


Sad, but close to the truth.

Thank god I get my news from Fark.
 
2017-10-12 03:55:57 PM  

boyvoyeur: Who gets their news from Facebook?


The numbers I've seen thrown around is 60-70% of people get a majority of their news from FB, and on social media you're targeted with stories that you'll like/confirm your biases.  It's why the whole fake news thing was/is such a big deal.

People put themselves in an information bubble and don't take the 5 seconds to confirm a story before hitting share.
 
2017-10-12 04:01:10 PM  
Facebook just told me to buy a Jimmy Deans hash breakfast something or other. Mmmmmm
 
2017-10-12 04:03:53 PM  

fernt: EdgeRunner: boyvoyeur: Who gets their news from Facebook?

According to this Facebook article I just read, something like 110% of everybody.

Sad, but close to the truth.

Thank god I get my news from Fark.


Don't know if joking, but...

Over the summer, I spent a couple of months at our rural cabin salmon fishing. There is very limited internet, so I was mostly Farkless.

We do have Sat TV, so I was trying to keep up on need that way. It was futile. Every "news" channel, I learned, just addresses the most outrage-inducing story all day long. One story, addressed by a dozen shows and formats, each with a different set of consultants screaming over top of one another.

I realized that yes, I actually do get most of my useful news from Fark.

Even Google News is mostly useless.
 
2017-10-12 04:04:28 PM  

Anastacya: Oh I am sure the responses to articles marked as fake will be calm and rational. Also, it does look like they're including links explaining why an article is fake, but I guarantee that people will holler that article is a crock.


I unfriend you.
 
2017-10-12 04:08:06 PM  
If it takes 3 days it may as well take a year. "A lie travels halfway around the world before the truth has its shoes on."
Sad that we need this, but I catch my liberal friends from time to time falling for obvious crap, which hurts when you see "your side" doing it.
It's so simple: if you can't find multiple sources that are widely trusted and ostensibly non-partisan then wait before believing or sharing it. No matter how much you want it to be true or how realistic it sounds to you.
 
2017-10-12 04:09:05 PM  

Thingster: boyvoyeur: Who gets their news from Facebook?

The numbers I've seen thrown around is 60-70% of people get a majority of their news from FB, and on social media you're targeted with stories that you'll like/confirm your biases.  It's why the whole fake news thing was/is such a big deal.

People put themselves in an information bubble and don't take the 5 seconds to confirm a story before hitting share.


I "yelled" at some people for that last week. They posted some crap about people secretly following you on FB and how to find them. The directions on how to do it made no sense, so I looked it up, and sure enough it was bogus. I told everyone posting on it that *sigh* they should really confirm stuff like that, and you'd think we all would have learned something about that over the past year. Someone commented back that not everyone had the time to research these things. My reply was that it took everyone longer to follow the directions and post how creepy it was than it took me to find out that it was false.
 
2017-10-12 04:13:36 PM  

EdgeRunner: cardex:


Last yearSnopes went out of its way to mark any bat shiat crazy conspiracy theroy about hillary as unproven, while marking any story that made trump look bad as false even when they were later proven true.

Snopes rates this as MISLEADING, and makes the case that they're biased towards everyone and everything simultaneously.


lulz at the link... and I thought Fark was the only place one could get called a brainwashed leftist in one thread and an alt right trumper in another by two different posters simultaneously.
 
2017-10-12 04:17:50 PM  

greatgodyoshi: Thingster: boyvoyeur: Who gets their news from Facebook?

The numbers I've seen thrown around is 60-70% of people get a majority of their news from FB, and on social media you're targeted with stories that you'll like/confirm your biases.  It's why the whole fake news thing was/is such a big deal.

People put themselves in an information bubble and don't take the 5 seconds to confirm a story before hitting share.

I "yelled" at some people for that last week. They posted some crap about people secretly following you on FB and how to find them. The directions on how to do it made no sense, so I looked it up, and sure enough it was bogus. I told everyone posting on it that *sigh* they should really confirm stuff like that, and you'd think we all would have learned something about that over the past year. Someone commented back that not everyone had the time to research these things. My reply was that it took everyone longer to follow the directions and post how creepy it was than it took me to find out that it was false.


In the runup to the election my GF got really bad about sharing fake news and satire as if it were real.

"OMG, can you believe. . .!"
"No, because that's not real."
"How do you know? (Searches to confirm story)"
"If the story is too perfect, it's likely fake or satire"
"OMG, it IS fake!"

/Got to the point that if she sent me a news link I wouldn't open it unless she prefaced the link with a "I already verified this through another source"
 
2017-10-12 04:30:19 PM  
Zuckerberg met with conservative pundits last year to "open up" news feeds to conservative (fake) stories.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/18/media/facebook-conservative-leaders-m​e​eting/index.html

Facebook's algorithms had no problems filtering out fake news before this treasonous little meeting.

Zuckerberg should be given a fair trial and then hanged.

Lock him up in ADX Florence until he exhausts his appeals.
 
2017-10-12 04:42:19 PM  

cardex: Last yearSnopes went out of its way to mark any bat shiat crazy conspiracy theroy about hillary as unproven, while marking any story that made trump look bad as false even when they were later proven true.


You must have several examples then.
 
2017-10-12 04:47:03 PM  

Lenny_da_Hog: fernt: EdgeRunner: boyvoyeur: Who gets their news from Facebook?

According to this Facebook article I just read, something like 110% of everybody.

Sad, but close to the truth.

Thank god I get my news from Fark.

Don't know if joking, but...

Over the summer, I spent a couple of months at our rural cabin salmon fishing. There is very limited internet, so I was mostly Farkless.

We do have Sat TV, so I was trying to keep up on need that way. It was futile. Every "news" channel, I learned, just addresses the most outrage-inducing story all day long. One story, addressed by a dozen shows and formats, each with a different set of consultants screaming over top of one another.

I realized that yes, I actually do get most of my useful news from Fark.

Even Google News is mostly useless.


No snark intended. While I try to cover the waterfront on my own, these days a lot of referenced stories on Fark are coming from sources I wouldn't normally waste time on (e.g., Vice; Mediaite, etc.). Might as well get a glimpse of how the other half is being "informed."

The thought of people getting their echo chamber "news" from their Facebook feeds is kind of disturbing.

But to the topic, who are they assigning as the "fake news" gatekeepers? That's the question.  Remember, "fake news" broke O.J. details before the mainstream would touch them and I believe the Edwards illegitimate kid story too.
 
2017-10-12 06:20:19 PM  
Yeah, well, I have two more that I'm hoping to get adopted.

dpoisn.comView Full Size


dpoisn.comView Full Size


//Someday...
 
2017-10-12 06:47:46 PM  
Facebook has been working with external fact-checkers like PolitiFact and Snopes

Oh jesus, lol

This is going to be used to bury stories the democrats don't like

That's the unbearable stink of all this hysteria about fake news
 
2017-10-12 07:11:03 PM  

Kangaroo_Ralph: cardex: Last yearSnopes went out of its way to mark any bat shiat crazy conspiracy theroy about hillary as unproven, while marking any story that made trump look bad as false even when they were later proven true.

You must have several examples then.


Yeah, really...  People who don't like finding out their story was debunked always say the same thing about Snopes.  That they are liberal shills, or full of crap, or someshiat.

In fairness, I've gone and done my own research, and I've yet to find their assessments to be dubious.

But, also in fairness, I don't generally check Snopes so often anymore.  It's pretty farking easy to do research on your own nowadays.  And besides, we have John Oliver now.
 
2017-10-12 07:16:37 PM  

swahnhennessy: "A lie travels halfway around the world before the truth has its shoes on."


This one now has a place on 10/06/2018 on the Quote of the Day
 
2017-10-12 07:47:56 PM  
Anyone who's been reading a bit of Snopes knows how biased they are.

My favourite was the article about "Was the bashing of  a white motorist politically motivated?" with the video of black guys beating a white guy while screaming "Don't vote Trump!" It was ruled False.
After they got some flak for it, they changed it to "Mixture" with no explanation given. So farking slimy.
 
Displayed 43 of 43 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report