Meta to get rid of factcheckers

From what I saw, Facebook didn't actually censor content; they just marked it as questionable if the fact-checkers deemed something unfactual. The content was hidden until you clicked on the warning.
 

Aunt Bea said:
I’m not concerned about this because I was taught to think for myself and be a bit skeptical.

I am concerned that we haven’t done a good job in passing those basic skills on to the generations that follow us.

“Healthy scepticism is the basis of all accurate observation.” - Arthur Conan Doyle
Click to expand...
It isn't you we are worried about, Aunt Bea. It's all those others who never learned how to think for themselves.
 
Aunt Bea said:
I’m not concerned about this because I was taught to think for myself and be a bit skeptical.

I am concerned that we haven’t done a good job in passing those basic skills on to the generations that follow us.

“Healthy scepticism is the basis of all accurate observation.” - Arthur Conan Doyle
Click to expand...

This sounds good, but I would just add that we have to get our knowledge from somewhere. Some people get stuck on a single source. In fact, contrary to what some might claim, the art of "research" has not gotten better with the internet, I'm convinced it's worse!

Far too many people seem to think that as long as they agree on something, or believe something, there is no need to research. They forget than an actual education, at a learning facility, is far more valuable than a Google search. Let alone reading an actual book on a topic! People don't have the time for interests these days. Their phones concern they free brain cycles, or mindlessly chatting on Social Media.
 
HermitHogan said:
From what I saw, Facebook didn't actually censor content; they just marked it as questionable if the fact-checkers deemed something unfactual. The content was hidden until you clicked on the warning.
Click to expand...
Not entirely true. For a short period, I was outright banned from FB for something I had posted. (about covid which has now been proven to be truthful) Many other times, I was shadow banned by having my posts not showing up to any of my followers.
I'm glad he's actually admitting they were censoring dissenting opinions, however, I suspect this move is because FB has been bleeding revenue.
 
squatting dog said:
Not entirely true. For a short period, I was outright banned from FB for something I had posted. (about covid which has now been proven to be truthful) Many other times, I was shadow banned by having my posts not showing up to any of my followers.
I'm glad he's actually admitting they were censoring dissenting opinions, however, I suspect this move is because FB has been bleeding revenue.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I got banned one time for making a joke that was "insensitive." :ROFLMAO:

F*ck Facebook.
 
I was on facebook when it first began. It was decent and people used it mainly for college connections and help. Soon as someone posted the first cat pic......it was over and got worse. I dumped it a few years ago.
 
Twostep said:
Meta has actual worker bees in rotating shifts checking behind AI.
Click to expand...

They’ve been way too restrictive. My Class B RV is built on a Ram Promaster base and they have a history of transmission problems especially in mountainous areas. I’m on several fb groups, both Winnebago and Promaster. People have gotten temporary bans (facebook jail) for using ‘tranny’ referring to transmissions.
 
Last edited:
We'll see. :rolleyes: I don't think it's a coincidence that this came about after his meeting with "you know who". Regarding the censorship, I'll see if FB (Meta) is still censoring certain groups of people. My son and a good friend told me examples of posts being removed a couple of weeks ago.
FB also claimed certain posts didn't fit their standards, but let other posts that were derogatory and hateful stay up. SMDH!
 
In a related story, Meta has been using pirated books they acquired from Russia to train its AI models.

Mark Zuckerberg approved Meta’s use of “pirated” versions of copyright-protected books to train the company’s artificial intelligence models, a group of authors has alleged in a US court filing.​
​
Citing internal Meta communications, the filing claims that the social network company’s chief executive backed the use of the LibGen dataset, a vast online archive of books, despite warnings within the company’s AI executive team that it is a dataset “we know to be pirated”.​

What an ass.
 
CallMeKate said:
Apparently they have a long way to go. I just now loaded FB to check on a nephew and I see that my favorite local independent news reporter just had a video pulled by Meta AI for "inciting violence." It was a video of the fires in Los Angeles. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Let me ask you a question, if I may (ignore, of not).

Do you agree what being presented with negative content can condition a person to not only expect it, but assume it?

Do you agree that people are influenced by the content they are most constantly presented with?

Do you think someone drowning in negative content can begin to see negative content everywhere?
 
VaughanJB said:
Do you agree what being presented with negative content can condition a person to not only expect it, but assume it?

Do you agree that people are influenced by the content they are most constantly presented with?

Do you think someone drowning in negative content can begin to see negative content everywhere?
Click to expand...
 
Naturally said:
Those who think FB fact checkers and monitors weren't (extremely) biased and that "blue" in bluesky has anything to do with the color of the firmament above, have their heads in the sand ... or some place dark ... or maybe need a fact check
Click to expand...

I'm full of questions today. :D

Working for a business means following the party line. ie. Doing what you're told. Whatever the defined rules/policies are, you must follow them. This is perfectly normal.

Personal bias? Sure, we all have them, but in a corporate environment, this is secondary. You're either complying by the rules of the job, or you're not.
 
But are social media considered corporate companies and should we just "go along" with lies and slander even though we aren't employees? BTW, I'm on FB mainly for my family and just recently on bluesky to try it out and see if it's worth using. Too early to tell,so far.
 
Sasha said:
But are social media considered corporate companies and should we just "go along" with lies and slander even though we aren't employees? BTW, I'm on FB mainly for my family and just recently on bluesky to try it out and see if it's worth using. Too early to tell,so far.
Click to expand...

Name a Social Media site, and you name a corporate company. It'd all about making money. If not directly, then through third parties. There isn't a single Social Media site that operates any differently.

Which Is why I show disdain about so called "mainstream media" and "alternative media". It's all about viewership. All about revenue.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top