Facebook is probably the worst place for news a person could possibly go. It’s absolutely filled with fake hoax articles that most of my dumbshit friends actually believe
Yeah right. You just wait until Zuckerberg and Bill Gates send me that money they owe me after I posted that status. Then we’ll see who’s laughing.
My friends just post pictures of their pets and their outing to the beach.
You’re not supposed to follow your friends, you’re supposed to follow The News.
If you put BBC, The Independant, The NYT… and such… into your FB feed, you can drown out all your crazy friends who are into magnets, crystals, paleo diets, and Astrology.
A social network is only as intelligent as the people who use it.
People are stupid so Facebook is pretty stupid.
“EMINEM is moving to [small town in middle of nowhere]???!? We’re gonna see him alllll the time!!!1! So stoked! Maybbe he’ll ask us for a cup of sugar lol”
If you get your news or politics from facebook trending you are part of the problem, regardless of what side you are on.
Journalism is really great when it challenges popular opinion. Voting on the news ensures you’ll never see great journalism.
Journalism is really great when it challenges popular opinion.
Well, no, if it challenges popular opinion then it just challenges popular opinion.
You can have shitty journalism that’s contrarian, and you can also have great journalism that goes with the flow.
I think the spirit of his comment was more in-line with valuable journalism in comparison to great journalism. Great writing is of little value to society when it doesn’t actually change anyone’s minds. Comparatively, you can have mediocre-writing from a perspective that many readers had not considered, which I would argue is more valuable than the other bit of journalism.
“Great” is a very vague term than can mean useful to one person, and perfection to the next.
Great writing is of little value to society when it doesn’t actually change anyone’s minds.
That isn’t true at all. There is value in bolstering our collective beliefs. For example, I doubt the Gettysburg address changed anyone’s attitude about the war, or about the purpose of our republic, but we now look on it as one of the great summations of American ideals.
And the assholery that goes along with the comments in /r/news is unique as well.
Yeah, because the rest of the commentary on reddit is so rich.
Honestly? Yeah it is. So long as you stay off the defaults and purposely inflammatory or “circle-jerky” subreddits, you end up finding far more comments that sound like reasonable humans wrote them than not.
You don’t even have to go to other subreddits. Just collapse useless comment chains until you find what’s relevant to you. I think people are more concerned with having a popular opinion sometimes than actually attempting to use the site to cater to their needs. I’m an avid Bernie supporter but I’ll be damned if I can get reliable information about Bernie on this website. It’s all the highest praise and complimentary I’ve ever seen. I don’t think Bernie has ever been wrong or made a mistake in his life. He’s Jewish too, so maybe he’s Jesus? According to reddit at least, that is until you collapse the praise comments and get to the actual discussion. Everything you want is there, you just have to look.
Voting on the news ensures you’ll never see great journalism.
Especially after a group of individuals with the power to remove certain stories decides which ones the public can vote on in the first place.
Especially when there are entire groups on the site where voting occurs who make it their miserable mission in life to censor the news and tamper with voting.
Especially when the administrators of the site know about these groups, are constantly questioned by members of the site about these groups but never do anything about them.
Especially when at least one former administrator went on to publicly join one of these groups.
Especially even if said story somehow gets approved, and doesn’t get vetoed by members of the community or other communities of the site who dislike inconvenient truths, those who approved the story to begin with can still censor the story regardless of how many votes from the community it gets.
The frontpage of the internets advertisers and liberal agenda.
The frontpage of the internets advertisers and liberal agenda.
You mean, beside the 100,000 anti-Hillary and Trump shit-posts? And all of the anti-BLM posts? And the HillaryForPrison posts? All the anti-Muslim posts. What about 2012 and 2008 when Ron Paul posts were all over the front page?
Yeah, it’s basically the USSR in here.
Honestly it’s pretty bad on both sides, some subs are huge liberal circlejerks and some are huge conservative circlejerks, the conservatives just make the front page way more often, for some reason.
Hence why at any given time for the past few months you can go to /r/ politics and see Bernie Sanders either as the subject or referenced in 75% of all the posts.
Undelete has the best stories, I think it’s funny how Reddit has so much censorship but we still pretend we are an open forum that anyone can contribute to.
It doesn’t matter if I get my information from Facebook, Wikipedia or /r/News, so long as it’s not my only source.
Fact check your opinions, people. Don’t trust one major news outlet for anything important.
Don’t trust one major news outlet for anything important.
That only works if you have a diversified set of news outlets. If you go from msnbc to dailykos and then to huffpost, you’ll get exactly the same thing each time.
This is a valid point. It becomes an echo chamber My list to cover the basics.
NYT National Review The Economist NPR PBS Newshour Washington Post Real Time BBC World News Meet The Press The Guardian The Independent
A variety of opinion and fact, which are clearly defined and covered by journalists on both sides of the spectrum. I find the truth probably (and often after stories unfold) it tends to be close to the truth.
I’m surprised someone hasn’t created something that takes a top story and from every major news outlet just pulls the facts out into a billeted list .
at least you get sources
When the mods delete posts I don’t get anything.
World news is heavily censored. If you remember the Muslim rape rampage in Cologne world news deleted any mention of it for days trying to suppress it. That’s just the best example but anything that doesn’t fit their narrative is deep Sixed.
Plain old /news, I donno.
Yet an FSM wedding in New Zealand makes the front page of /r/worldnews. Reddit, M’ladies and gentlemen.
If you get your news or politics from facebook trending you are part of the problem
Same goes for people who get their news from Comedy Central…
Which I bet aren’t even really trending, half the shit I see on there only ever has a couple of hundred likes.
They handpick what they want to get people to talk about and pretend it has already been trending.
And those who consume news on Facebook are more active on the site than other users by nearly every measure.
The problem is you can’t turn off or modify the “Trending” section, I looked into it because I felt that most of it was annoying or irrelevant to me. The only good part is the “Science and Technology” section, but you can’t set that as your default or turn off the other sections, like the incredibly inane Kardashian-loving “Entertainment” section.
Also I did definitely notice a left-leaning bias on the site; not that I’m a Ted Cruz voter but it does disturb me that as widespread as Facebook is that they’re manipulating content to spread an agenda. I bet you anything they’ve used the same methods to suppress any anti-Facebook story that would be trending.
“Social Fixer” is your friend. I got so sick of looking at that trending section; you can shut it off with the extension.
I bet you anything they’ve used the same methods to suppress any anti-Facebook story that would be trending.
The article says they did exactly that.
I guess this news shouldn’t be too surprising but it is disappointing. Overall, the slide towards totalitarianism in this country (among the left and right) is disturbing.
Relevance to the story: Zero
Feeding an offtopic circlejerk: Priceless
It’s a classic example of Reddit deferring the topic away from any wrongdoing towards conservative content.
Facebook users are being restricted from access to a particular political perspective, whether they agree with it or not. That’s bad for any society. Facebook is harming it’s users and you’re making excuses for them. Stop it.
True, but this dosent mean that it’s just on Facebook, it happens everywhere, local news, news sites, ect.
My high school students… they believe in a reality that is far from it. Sometimes, they speak of Onion articles as truth and Trump is going to sent all black people back to Africa.
Facebook trending is a curator of information, just like Reddit. So I’m not sure what you’re getting at.
And on top of that, I don’t expect much to come out of this being posted on Reddit, which is a very left leaning site.
Not surprised that the top comment is one that deflects from just how dangerous this sort of censorship is.
Honest question here, and I don’t use Facebook so that’s not where I get my news from, but where is left for us to get unbiased reporting that’s not trying to sell an angle? Every site I visit is so obvious. Even NYT. I used to watch BBC news, but even their BBC America version seems just as filtered as CNN sometimes. I guess the only way is to read both biased perspectives so I’m getting each side’s version of the truth?
No single source. Work. I look here. I see issues Im curious about and I google to find local and multiple sources. Then look at the differences between accounts of events and see what chaff you can disregard. No one place is going to tell you what you need to know, because quite honestly theres too much to know at this point.
care to explain why? it’s not facebook writing the articles, it’s actual news from reuters, AP, NYT etc. using their “hot news” list is different from going to Google News or similar how exactly?
But only from the comments. I don’t actually read the articles!
I read the comments before the story sometimes because the top comment is usually explaining the bullshit of the story. OR the story is a video and the cop comment is putting it into text form.
Even so Reddit is still biased as hell towards liberal news. It’s not necessarily bad considering the demographic, but it’s another world out there that gets lost in the narrative.
Take /politics for instance a few months ago where it was basically Sanders central. (It still kinda is) /worldnews constantly suppresses conservative news /Europe outright bans any negative stuff on muslim immigrants /European is borderline stormfront /technology has a hard on for Google and hates apple
Yes, I’m a conservative. No, I don’t get my news from Facebook. Yes, Facebook has the right to suppress and promote whatever news they deem worthy. That said, I find this to be quite revealing of what FB is about. Now it is evident FB can paint the narrative. So the redditors defending this should realize they’re also being played on Reddit and FB.
Reddit is definitely definitely a pandering whore when the hivemind takes up an opinion. I could take a dump and arrange the turds to say “HILLARY FOR PRISON” and it would get 6000 karma. Same for Ron Paul way back in the day. We’re so far from a standard for journalistic integrity you’d need the Hubble to spot it. We really need to blow the dust off those down-arrows.
Then again, Reddit isn’t really about Journalism, is it?
I see something similar on /r/politics. If you only get your news source from one place you’re pretty much only hearing what the moderators want you to hear. Considering how many people go on this site they hold a lot of power. Never mind the fact the upvoted posts are going to be what the general population agree with leading to a massive echo chamber.
I’m not a conservative, but I listen to fox news radio because I like to hear both sides of the story. This has caused me to not be on any political “team” and now I just side with how I feel about an issue rather than what the news source is telling me what my opinion should be.
Same old story. I’m moderate-left and swear by Drudge, even though his placement and wording in headlines can be incredibly misleading. Reddit, Drudge, AJ, RT, NPR and the BBC all have their pros and cons.
That said I’d never rely on FB for news.
Moderate-left and swear by Drudge?
That’d be nearly equivalent to a moderate-right swearing by HuffPo. I’m pretty firm-right and sometimes Drudge is a little too on-the-nose, even for me.
Seriously, Drudge is definitely a conservative blog/link aggregator
But if you ignore Drudge’s headlines and read the articles, most of them are links to AP or other objective news sources. He just editorializes his own headlines. I just ignore the stuff from conservative blog trash.
I completely agree with you. I’m usually surprised that the actual content is from non-biased sources. The problem is that it’s damn-near impossible to ignore the headlines, especially if you lean that direction anyway. My parents will consistently quote me the Drudge headlines without knowing the true story.
Not surprising given the history of this company which thinks we’re all idiots.
Zuckerberg was chatting with an unnamed friend, apparently in early 2004. Business Insider, which has a series of quite juicy anecdotes about Facebook’s early days, takes the credit for this one.
The exchange apparently ran like this:
Zuck: Yeah so if you ever need info about anyone at Harvard
Zuck: Just ask.
Zuck: I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS
[Redacted Friend’s Name]: What? How’d you manage that one?
Zuck: People just submitted it.
Zuck: I don’t know why.
Zuck: They “trust me”
Zuck: Dumb fucks
Not surprising given the history of this company which thinks we’re all idiots.
They’re not wrong.
“think about how stupid the average person is, well half of the population is dumber than that.”
- I forget
Yeah, true, but intelligence (whatever your preferred metric is) is probably gonna fall on a normal distribution. So while you could have room with 3 guys with an IQ of 105 and one guy with 85, making 75% of the population above average, it’s unlikely to happen in real life.
Still, it’s pretty sweet that a self-aggrandising quote about how everyone else is stupid is technically wrong.
I see this quote thrown around a lot, but is it really all that relevant these days? Isn’t it at least possible that he said this when he was still a dumb kid, and that things have changed in the 12 years since then? Maybe he was just having a bad day that day, or was trying to act boastful or something? Didn’t you ever say stupid shit when you were 20?
Maybe if FB didn’t operate under the same model of trying to get as much info as possible from people. They haven’t acted in a way that dispels the original premise.
Well, that’s how almost all web companies with these days.