The danger of fake news and rumour on social media

Status
Closed
Jan 2017
780
UK
#3
More online moderators sounds good in theory, in practice the Internet is so enormous you'd need thousands of extra moderators, most likely relying on algorithms which can't always understand context. Of course you'll upset the paranoiacs who believe this'll be a slippery slope towards recreating Minority Report.

Informing people not to take everything they read online at face value.

I don't think we can stop people spreading vile rumours online, we've had false rumours spread over the radio, hearsay, the TV. Social Media and the Internet can simply export it faster with greater coverage.
 

AlpinLuke

Forum Staff
Oct 2011
26,878
Italy, Lago Maggiore
#4
They risk nothing ...

the main problem is that if a newspaper publishes fake news, sooner or later the corporation owning that newspaper will lose readers and so money. If someone launches fake news on the net ... he won't lose money.

The case reminds the Great Witch Hunting which caused the death of not a few lonely old women suspected to be evil witches.

There would be a legal way to stop this: to consider the owners of the internet sites responsible for the crime ... in this case it's homicide: 15 - 20 years in an ugly prison.

In EU we are doing something similar about copyrighted contents ... I think that it should be enlarged to news.

If the entire management of Google risked to spend 15 years in prison because of a single fake news ... it will take action!
 

Corvidius

Ad Honorem
Jul 2017
2,995
Crows nest
#5
There is nothing to be done other than total state control of the internet, total surveillance and the ability to disconnect anybody within moments of wrong-think being identified. We will all have to use our real names and a fixed IP number tagged to our state ID number. Wrong-think can then be punished by removal of your State ID number, which will be tied into you credit card, which will be your only method of obtaining food and any goods and services. It will also be your front door key, so you will be homeless. There was a sci-fi novel about this back in the 70s or early 80s but I forget the title and author, but not his very prescient ideas about how our electronic future will end up. After that rant I'm of for some tasty new food called, I think, soylent green, all wrapped up in a fake newspaper printed by your ever friendly, ever watchful State for you convenience, comfort and happiness in this dangerous world where some people don't believe the state and think for themselves, wicked, wicked.
 
Likes: Todd Feinman

Naomasa298

Forum Staff
Apr 2010
35,065
T'Republic of Yorkshire
#6
There is nothing to be done other than total state control of the internet, total surveillance and the ability to disconnect anybody within moments of wrong-think being identified. We will all have to use our real names and a fixed IP number tagged to our state ID number. Wrong-think can then be punished by removal of your State ID number, which will be tied into you credit card, which will be your only method of obtaining food and any goods and services. It will also be your front door key, so you will be homeless. There was a sci-fi novel about this back in the 70s or early 80s but I forget the title and author, but not his very prescient ideas about how our electronic future will end up. After that rant I'm of for some tasty new food called, I think, soylent green, all wrapped up in a fake newspaper printed by your State.
Whatever you may think "wrong-think" is, we're talking about people being lynched and beaten to death thanks to rumours.
 

AlpinLuke

Forum Staff
Oct 2011
26,878
Italy, Lago Maggiore
#7
And reality is that fake news are dangerous only when they circulate on great networks [Google, Facebook, Twitter ...]. So fake news "producers" post them on those platform. The related problem [this is why I would like to see the managements of Google, Facebook, Twitter and other legally responsible] is that fake news generate further audience. This allows to suspect that great networks want fake news ... to increase audience. But this was just a malicious thought.
 

Corvidius

Ad Honorem
Jul 2017
2,995
Crows nest
#8
Whatever you may think "wrong-think" is, we're talking about people being lynched and beaten to death thanks to rumours.
I really don't see anything that can be done other than total control or shutting it all down, which will not happen. If in a village someone posts a false rumour to attack another person, that rumour can be spread in minutes, and the mob out with their pitchforks soon after. How can some techie sitting in an office miles away know this is fake, and has any ability to stop it before a lynching takes place, they cannot, only bemoan after the event. How can the techie, or machine, know that any messages that contain certain words and phrases is real or a joke, they cannot. Look at the state of Youtube these days where for "public safety" anything deemed "bad" by Youtube is pulled, unless it conforms with certain political beliefs, and that is another can of worms, though related, hence my use of "wrong-think". It's all connected.
 
Oct 2013
14,533
Europix
#9
They risk nothing ...


the main problem is that if a newspaper publishes fake news, sooner or later the corporation owning that newspaper will lose readers and so money. If someone launches fake news on the net ... he won't lose money.


The case reminds the Great Witch Hunting which caused the death of not a few lonely old women suspected to be evil witches.


There would be a legal way to stop this: to consider the owners of the internet sites responsible for the crime ... in this case it's homicide: 15 - 20 years in an ugly prison.


In EU we are doing something similar about copyrighted contents ... I think that it should be enlarged to news.


If the entire management of Google risked to spend 15 years in prison because of a single fake news ... it will take action!

The problem is that by that You limit spreading the disease, You are treating the patient but You didn't eradicated the disease. It has to go further, to preventing it.

No moderator can prevent everything, unless he's God (which he isn't), and it's not even his role. No law will eliminated it. You have to eliminate the cause, and that's people, or more accurately not reasoning people.

It's why I said in my first post "education, relentless education".

I'll give an example:

A small NGO (it's three young guys, in fact) is proposing to all schools interested programs of "Education for the interconnected".

The first class (it's for very young kids) is on making them aware of it really mean, this internet.

They ask a kid that has a Facebook account (there always a lot of them, if not all) if he wants to take a selfie and post it on the Facebook. Which, invariably, a lot of kids are ready to do it.

They take the selfie, they print it in some dozens of copies and then propose to the class to get out, in the streets and to post those selfies on the walls in the streets, all around.

Inevitably, all kids are outraged by the idea.

And the question comes "but what else did You do when posting on Facebook?"

Believe me, it works everytime. The kids realize. And You can extremely easily made them aware of a lot more. It that it has to be done.

In summ: it's not laws that stopped witch hunt. Witch hunt really ceased to exist when people understood that witches doesn't exist.
 
Likes: duncanness
Status
Closed

Similar History Discussions