Opinion Polls: Delphi's Polling Place

Hosted by Cstar1

Opinion polls on all subjects. Opinions? Heck yes, we have opinions - but we're *always* nice about it, even when ours are diametrically opposed to yours. Register your vote today!

  • 4034
    MEMBERS
  • 75477
    MESSAGES
  • 25
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

Deceptive political videos on Facebook and Twitter   The Newsy You: News of Today

Started Sep-1 by MerlinsDad; 1131 views.
MerlinsDad

From: MerlinsDad

Sep-1

Republicans are flooding the internet with deceptive videos and Big Tech isn't keeping up

News item by Donie O'Sullivan and Daniel Dale, September 1
https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/01/tech/trump-facebook-twitter-fact-check/index.html

This article is well worth reading.  At the bottom of the article are details of the 4 videos in question.

bolding mine --MD

A series of deceptively edited and misleading videos shared by prominent Republicans have run up millions of views across Facebook and Twitter in just the past few days. And while both companies have pledged to combat misinformation, their responses to these videos followed a familiar pattern: often they act too late, do too little, or don't do anything at all.

Between Sunday and Monday, high-profile Republicans, including President Donald Trump, shared at least four misleading videos online.
Though the effectiveness of the "manipulated media" label and other such labels is unclear at best, Twitter does appear to be becoming increasingly willing to use them to call out misinformation from politicians. Meanwhile, although Facebook has hired a global network of fact-checkers, for the most part they are not allowed to fact-check politicians, a policy that CEO Mark Zuckerberg has vigorously defended.   Facebook says it won't tolerate misinformation it determines could cause harm, like false claims about Covid-19.
Neither company appears willing to apply their policies regarding medical misinformation to misinformation from US politicians that could mislead voters or undermine November's election, though (expect perhaps in exceptional circumstances, like someone posting the wrong date of the election). And if the past few days are any indication, that could mean they will continue to serve as conduits and amplifiers for a flood of misinformation.
Showtalk
Staff

From: Showtalk

Sep-2

People have been blocked for posting true political commentary as well. I forget what they call it when their accounts are visible to them but no one else can see them.  Zuckerberg is right in realizing his business and income doesn’t come from facts or content but from gathering data. He may sound like a socialist but he is an example of a big, free market capitalist. 

If you don’t like Facebook content or policies, then don’t rely on it for facts. Most people don’t. In fact, I bet you don’t even have an account or use it.  Whether one likes Trump or hates him, none of us should rely on social media for our news.

Showtalk said:

If you don’t like Facebook content or policies, then don’t rely on it for facts. Most people don’t. In fact, I bet you don’t even have an account or use it.

<raising hand> I don't even have an account either, and proudly wear that as a badge of honor. There's a few of us (and I suspect growing in number) who have blocked IP address blocks and known domains associated with Facebook at the firewall, and there seems to now be a growing number of Firefox and Chrome plug-ins such as "Anti-Social" that filter out the 1x1 pixel web bugs and "like", "share", and cross-domain embedded content on other sites that can effectively stop information leakage to the platforms.

And now it looks like FireFox is going to bake this into the browser as a much more easily enabled block:

https://beebom.com/mozilla-firefox-to-block-social-media-tracking-by-default/

Showtalk
Staff

From: Showtalk

Sep-2

People can do that now with blocking programs.

MerlinsDad

From: MerlinsDad

Sep-2

A news item about deceptive political videos on Facebook and Twitter.

  • Edited September 2, 2020 6:09 pm  by  MerlinsDad
Showtalk said:

People have been blocked for posting true political commentary as well. I forget what they call it when their accounts are visible to them but no one else can see them.

Shadow banning

Showtalk said:

People can do that now with blocking programs.

However, blocking at the firewall, because it's a separate hardware platform with its own operating system and such, can be devastatingly effective precisely because it blocks the traffic to every computer downstream of it on the network. It also stops the technopeasant, who understands how to use blocking programs a little bit less than the average 17th century farmer would, from letting the tentacles of the blocked sites from getting into the LAN.

I had to do that at work once because someone kept getting malware infections no matter how often I cleaned them up - usually search engine browser hijacks - until I finally managed to figure out the admin access into the primary router / firewall and built up a good blacklist. Then it didn't matter how well or how poorly someone's computer was secured against malware, even if it tried to phone home and go re-install the malware, that traffic was blocked upstream and so although they couldn't get to their favorite online gambling or pr0n sites, they also didn't get re-infected.

I became a firm believer in external firewall based malware protection around that time, precisely because it lets you stop it from reaching even totally unprotected computers, whose users were incapable of understanding that the charming Nigerian prince really doesn't have $26 million US from an oil contract that he'll share if you just help launder it out of the country.

Showtalk
Staff

From: Showtalk

Sep-2

Yes, that is the term I was thinking of.

Showtalk
Staff

From: Showtalk

Sep-2

The famous Nigerian prince.

Yep. When I read about that Nigerian 419 scam, and hear of someone who is still so naive (or desperately suspending disbelief) to fall for it, I picture Eddie Murphy in "Coming to America"

TOP