Facebook accused of burying conservative news in its "trending" feature

[Blackjack200]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...sing-questions-about-its-political-influence/

Broken by Gizmodo:

http://gizmodo.com/former-facebook-workers-we-routinely-suppressed-conser-1775461006

Interesting.

In other words, Facebook’s news section operates like a traditional newsroom, reflecting the biases of its workers and the institutional imperatives of the corporation. Imposing human editorial values onto the lists of topics an algorithm spits out is by no means a bad thing—but it is in stark contrast to the company’s claims that the trending module simply lists “topics that have recently become popular on Facebook.”

These new allegations emerged after Gizmodo last week revealed details about the inner workings of Facebook’s trending news team—a small group of young journalists, primarily educated at Ivy League or private East Coast universities, who curate the “trending” module on the upper-right-hand corner of the site. As we reported last week, curators have access to a ranked list of trending topics surfaced by Facebook’s algorithm, which prioritizes the stories that should be shown to Facebook users in the trending section. The curators write headlines and summaries of each topic, and include links to news sites. The section, which launched in 2014, constitutes some of the most powerful real estate on the internet and helps dictate what news Facebook’s users—167 million in the US alone—are reading at any given moment.

I generally despise Facebook, I think it encourages narcissism and the superficial. I like Twitter much more, which seems more like people sharing news stories and ideas. (Although I admit there's a fair bit of narcissism there too.)

It may be within Facebook's rights to editorialize their "trending" module in this way, but it seems deeply unethical to imply that its algorithmically driven rather than Facebook's editors telling you what they think you should care about.

 

[sandorski]

If they are it's not working going by the crap that ends up on my Friends/Family Likes/Shares.

 

[Blackjack200]

Haha, so true. But it's sort of the point, isn't it? What's really trending on FB is often stuff like birth certificates, Benghazi, Sharia law, etc.

Maybe they should just change the name of the feature from "Trending" to "What would be trending if y'all weren't a bunch of rubes!"

 

[Squeetard]

If they are it's not working going by the crap that ends up on my Friends/Family Likes/Shares.

Same here lol. Burn Trudeau!

 

[IGBT]

No surprise..the blinkers and blinders of liberalism are all through it. All part of the liberal false promise of "fairness".

 

[PokerGuy]

Is this any surprise at all to anyone? Lefty "journalist" types working the media to push leftist agenda. Nothing new there, except that it's facebook instead of NBC/ABC/NYT etc etc.

They are obviously within their rights to push whatever leftist crap they want to, but lying about how the crap gets selected is another matter.

 

[PokerGuy]

All part of the liberal false promise of "fairness".

Unfairness in the name of fairness is fine. Racism in the name of reducing racism is fine. Intolerance and hatred in the name of reducing intolerance and hatred is fine. /libs

 

[fskimospy]

Is this any surprise at all to anyone? Lefty "journalist" types working the media to push leftist agenda. Nothing new there, except that it's facebook instead of NBC/ABC/NYT etc etc.

They are obviously within their rights to push whatever leftist crap they want to, but lying about how the crap gets selected is another matter.

The other difference would be that Facebook isn't a journalistic organization unlike NBC/ABC/NYT. In this case it seems to be some genuine bias at work, which they should either eliminate or at least acknowledge.

The good news is that there's been exhaustive research into media bias from the larger pool of media that the other organizations belong to and found that media bias in the aggregate is a conservative myth.

 

[IronWing]

The section, which launched in 2014, constitutes some of the most powerful real estate on the internet and helps dictate what news Facebook’s users—167 million in the US alone—are reading at any given moment.

Really? That's just dumb.

 

[Blackjack200]

Really? That's just dumb.

I think that's poorly phrased. It doesn't really dictate, it influences. If I put a link in front of you that says "X" is trending, you're more likely to click on X than if I didn't put it in front of you.

 

[Texashiker]

I thought the left was about equality?

Seems to me the democrats are back to their old tricks of oppression. Between suppressing news and rioting in the streets, it is the same ole song and dance with liberal democrats.

 

[Blackjack200]

The other difference would be that Facebook isn't a journalistic organization unlike NBC/ABC/NYT. In this case it seems to be some genuine bias at work, which they should either eliminate or at least acknowledge.

My big problem with this is that Facebook presents itself as a simple platform to share messages, pictures, and videos with your friends, when it's actually a highly curated, algorithmically driven content site trying to boost engagement and ad revenue.

That's why they filter out graphic images and offensive content, and I'm sure the same kind of thinking is behind this. "Oh, if people come onto facebook and it looks like a bunch of chain email crap, they won't come to facebook as much anymore".

Again, this may be within their rights, but I feel it's unethical, and it will end up hurting them. This reminds me of India's decision to block their free internet initiative, doesn't seem so silly now. I wonder if Marc Andreeson has tweeted anything about this or if he's too busy wishing India was still an English colony.

Edit: Just checked his feed and nothing yet. I wonder if Zetterburg called him and told him to STFU until they make a formal comment on it.

 

[DrPizza]

Seems to me that such a policy, whether accidental or intentional, brings balance. I see far more conservative crap being shared than I do liberal crap. E.g., yesterday, "Reagan said the government's problem wasn't ... blah blah blah, but was a problem with spending too much money." Uhh, didn't Reagan triple the national debt in 8 years, and have a higher deficit to GDP ratio than the last year or so?

 

[PokerGuy]

The other difference would be that Facebook isn't a journalistic organization unlike NBC/ABC/NYT. In this case it seems to be some genuine bias at work, which they should either eliminate or at least acknowledge.

Whether facebook is or isn't a "journalistic" organization doesn't matter. They all work the same way -- a news room and editorial board full of lefties, pretending to be unbiased. Anyone who believes they actually keep their biases out of their work is delusional.

The good news is that there's been exhaustive research into media bias from the larger pool of media that the other organizations belong to and found that media bias in the aggregate is a conservative myth.

Of course, of course, some lefties declare there is no bias. Very believable

 

[Texashiker]

Seems to me that such a policy, whether accidental or intentional, brings balance.

In other words you approve of censorship.

 

[foghorn67]

Seems to me that such a policy, whether accidental or intentional, brings balance. I see far more conservative crap being shared than I do liberal crap. E.g., yesterday, "Reagan said the government's problem wasn't ... blah blah blah, but was a problem with spending too much money." Uhh, didn't Reagan triple the national debt in 8 years, and have a higher deficit to GDP ratio than the last year or so?

The fact you seem apologetic towards this is disturbing.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

 

[PokerGuy]

The fact you seem apologetic towards this is disturbing.

I have no problem as long as they are up front about what they are doing so everyone knows exactly what they are pushing. Pretending they are neutral providers of information when in fact they are pushing an agenda should not be OK.

 

[fskimospy]

Whether facebook is or isn't a "journalistic" organization doesn't matter. They all work the same way -- a news room and editorial board full of lefties, pretending to be unbiased. Anyone who believes they actually keep their biases out of their work is delusional.

Well anyone except for the people that, you know, actually conducted empirical research into it that is, haha.

Of course, of course, some lefties declare there is no bias. Very believable

Ah yes, the old argument of 'the media is biased and if some researcher find differently that just shows they are biased too'. No matter what the evidence says your belief doesn't change.

 

[theeedude]

Typical rightwing tactic. Spread innuendo of bias to get preferential treatment.

 

[PokerGuy]

Typical rightwing tactic. Spread innuendo of bias to get preferential treatment.

Oh, like in this case?

Perfect example of exactly the opposite.

 

[hal2kilo]

They can do what ever makes their stock go up. I could care less. I would never go on Facebook. I've just owned the stock since the IPO

 

[PokerGuy]

Well anyone except for the people that, you know, actually conducted empirical research into it that is, haha.

If you want to believe some libs that determine there's no lib bias, that's up to you.

Anyone who thinks you can have editorial rooms and news rooms dominated by left wingers and not have that show up in their work is delusional. You're banking against human nature, which is always foolish.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

“I’d come on shift and I’d discover that CPAC or Mitt Romney or Glenn Beck or popular conservative topics wouldn’t be trending because either the curator didn’t recognize the news topic or it was like they had a bias against Ted Cruz.”

The former curator was so troubled by the omissions that they kept a running log of them at the time; this individual provided the notes to Gizmodo. Among the deep-sixed or suppressed topics on the list: former IRS official Lois Lerner, who was accused by Republicans of inappropriately scrutinizing conservative groups; Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker; popular conservative news aggregator the Drudge Report; Chris Kyle, the former Navy SEAL who was murdered in 2013; and former Fox News contributor Steven Crowder. “I believe it had a chilling effect on conservative news,” the former curator said.

Seems like a basic BS filter at work.

 

[PokerGuy]

Seems like a basic BS filter at work.

Which is fine if you want to tell everyone that you push a particular agenda and thus apply your "bs filter" to support that agenda. If you claim that the content actually represents what is trending and what is being read, then such a filter is wrong and a complete misrepresentation.

Again, they have every right to filter the way they want to. The problem I have is that they pretend to be neutral and lie about how the news gets fed.

 

[dank69]

Which is fine if you want to tell everyone that you push a particular agenda and thus apply your "bs filter" to support that agenda. If you claim that the content actually represents what is trending and what is being read, then such a filter is wrong and a complete misrepresentation.

Again, they have every right to filter the way they want to. The problem I have is that they pretend to be neutral and lie about how the news gets fed.

Maybe they are fact checking shit before they allow it into the feed? You know, so people don't think some celebrity death hoax is true or that Obama was born in Kenya?