YouTube, Twitter & Facebook to join forces in an effort to curb fake Covid19 news

[Master Disaster]

Preface: This topic is not for the general discussion of Covid19. Please use the official topic for that

 

The proposal seems to be a joint worldwide effort including social media outlets, governments and charities to create a more robust way of identifying and dealing with conspiracy theories and fake news with its initial focus being Covid19 and the imminent vaccinations.

 

Taking part will be the 3 top social media outlets, government agencies from the UK, India & Canada as well as Reuters and multiple fact checking charities from around the globe.

Quote

Three of the largest social networks have said they will join forces with fact-checkers, governments and researchers to try to come up with a new way of tackling misinformation.

 

Vaccine misinformation has been rife on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, with many questioning their efficacy.

 

At the same time, countries are preparing to roll out coronavirus vaccines in a bid to end the pandemic.

 

It is unclear how the initiative will improve the fight against fake news.

 

Fact-checking charity Full Fact will co-ordinate the collaboration.

 

Taking part in the effort alongside Facebook, Google-owned YouTube and Twitter are the UK's Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport; the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism; Africa Check; Canada's Privacy Council Office; and five other international fact-checking organisations.

Facebook are funding the initial setup and they hope to have a framework ready to go by January.

Quote

With funding from Facebook, an initial framework will launch in January, setting out new standards for tackling misinformation, as well as a set of aims on the best way to respond to such information.

Charity FullFact say that the current individual approach simply does not work and fake news is still reaching more people than it should.

Quote

By January when FullFact says an "initial framework" should have been agreed, countries should be starting to roll out vaccines to populations which have been subjected for months to a flood of scare stories about them. They will have seen stories ranging from suggestions that the vaccines have serious side-effects or haven't been properly tested to allegations that they are part of a plot involving Bill Gates to implant microchips in people and track them.

 

FullFact, which is one of the organisations providing fact checking for Facebook, says it has published 160 fact checks about the coronavirus and vaccines this year, with warning labels then being applied to many thousands of posts.

 

But the campaign group the Centre for Countering Digital Hate says 95% of such material on social media is not removed and reaches a vast audience.

 

The other challenge for this initiative will be getting social media giants with very different approaches to misinformation to agree a common set of rules. Meanwhile, politicians are getting impatient - in the UK the Labour Party has called for emergency legislation to stamp out anti-vaccine misinformation.

 

Will Moy, chief executive of Full Fact, added: "Bad information ruins lives, and we all have a responsibility to fight it where we see it. The coronavirus pandemic and the wave of false claims that followed demonstrated the need for a collective approach to this problem."

With a coronavirus vaccine potentially only months away, he said the concern was that "bad information could undermine trust in medicine when it matters most, and ultimately prolong this pandemic".

 

Facebook said it welcomed the effort "to discuss and develop new strategies" for tackling misinformation.

Source - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-55005385

 

While I think this is a great start and will hopefully lead to a more focused and combined approach to tackling fake news in general I have my doubts it will succeed. It all comes down to money and while Facebook is funding the initial setup I can't see any of the involved parties being willing to keep funding rolling in on an indefinite basis.

[Doobeedoo]

People are already getting affected in WoW it's out of control. Game mimics real time, weather and diseases. Yep. 

[PianoPlayer88Key]

Hmm... I thought I had heard that YouTube, Twitter and Facebook were all merging?

 

Does anyone remember the new company name?

 

 

Spoiler

And I wonder if anyone who might be trying to get RTX 30 series or RX 6000 series cards (I'm hanging onto my 3GB 1060, skipping this generation for now) might be wondering if Federal Express and United Parcel Service might have merged too...

(There's quite a few more, I'll just leave those two here for now.)

 

[Taf the Ghost]

So they're going to conspire to dictate the "correct" view on a topic they themselves made highly controversial in the first place? Actual reason is they need to rewrite history about how stupid they've been. This is part of the reason the Media loves to encourage the "woowoo" conspiracy types by shining a light on them. This is what an actual conspiracy looks like. There's really no hidden, secretive groups that try to rule the world. They all have websites, lol.

 

This is also probably Facebook's attempt to undo the self-inflicted disaster that was "Fake News". (It's been 4 years, so it's easy to forget that was a Facebook + American media initiative that backfired on them in ways few things ever have.)  So this move should also be read as an attempt to claw back some authoritative clout... by the leading tech censors of the day. 2020 sure as heck ain't over yet.

 

Sub-story: Vaccines are big, big business. Big, big business heavily controlled by governments, in fact. Or maybe "circular graft systems" works better. Where the corruption begins & ends is pretty hard to say, but the key part of vaccines to note is they are specifically lethal injections. It's just, in theory, a trade off a few dead from the vaccines compared to a lot dead from the lack of the vaccine. If it works. Most vaccines aren't anywhere close to as potent they like to make them out to be. The ones that work, work well for specific types of immunization programs. What this is mostly about is what's going to be coming: because of the asymptomatic transmission & inoculation rates being so high, even tortured statistics won't get you a statistically significant result for the utility of a vaccine. A lot of countries will fast track the vaccine. The numbers won't actually show anything, but they'll start forcing it. That'll then cause a nasty response. That's easily predictable. This is a move to have a prepared "defense". There's 10s of billions of USD riding on this for a lot of people. This is the way they think, so that's one section of what is going on.

 

Sub-story 2: "FullFact" is a fun bunch, being the central hub for this. One of those "good named, well connected" NGOs. Funding from the foundations associated with Google & eBay founders. So, Google (via YouTube) will tell you what is "True!" via a group funded by Google money. I guess "circular reasoning" would be kind of lost on them, eh?

[Teddy07]

Now anything that does not fit the mainstream narrative can be removed this way.

[PlayStation 2]

10 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

So they're going to conspire to dictate the "correct" view on a topic they themselves made highly controversial in the first place? Actual reason is they need to rewrite history about how stupid they've been. This is part of the reason the Media loves to encourage the "woowoo" conspiracy types by shining a light on them. This is what an actual conspiracy looks like. There's really no hidden, secretive groups that try to rule the world. They all have websites, lol.

 

This is also probably Facebook's attempt to undo the self-inflicted disaster that was "Fake News". (It's been 4 years, so it's easy to forget that was a Facebook + American media initiative that backfired on them in ways few things ever have.)  So this move should also be read as an attempt to claw back some authoritative clout... by the leading tech censors of the day. 2020 sure as heck ain't over yet.

 

Sub-story: Vaccines are big, big business. Big, big business heavily controlled by governments, in fact. Or maybe "circular graft systems" works better. Where the corruption begins & ends is pretty hard to say, but the key part of vaccines to note is they are specifically lethal injections. It's just, in theory, a trade off a few dead from the vaccines compared to a lot dead from the lack of the vaccine. If it works. Most vaccines aren't anywhere close to as potent they like to make them out to be. The ones that work, work well for specific types of immunization programs. What this is mostly about is what's going to be coming: because of the asymptomatic transmission & inoculation rates being so high, even tortured statistics won't get you a statistically significant result for the utility of a vaccine. A lot of countries will fast track the vaccine. The numbers won't actually show anything, but they'll start forcing it. That'll then cause a nasty response. That's easily predictable. This is a move to have a prepared "defense". There's 10s of billions of USD riding on this for a lot of people. This is the way they think, so that's one section of what is going on.

 

Sub-story 2: "FullFact" is a fun bunch, being the central hub for this. One of those "good named, well connected" NGOs. Funding from the foundations associated with Google & eBay founders. So, Google (via YouTube) will tell you what is "True!" via a group funded by Google money. I guess "circular reasoning" would be kind of lost on them, eh?

I'd wager that there's much more than tens of billions on the line. Tons of power is on the line. An entire narrative is on the line. Many, many, many, many, MANY people's entire livelihoods are on the line if the way the social media companies want to enforce this goes awry. And it will. We've seen it for the past five years what people will do to you if you don't fall in line, we'll certainly see it in how authoritative these companies wanna handle this.

And it's why I'm not really an advocate for letting private companies/corporations/whatever have full reign of speech on their site while claiming free speech. Because it can be massively distorted with enough money to shut anyone up that doesn't fall in line with them.

[Crossbred]

Even if there were good intentions here it would be shady. But there are not good intentions, just political ones. And it's automated censorship, which is just scary in general. No me gusta.

[Taf the Ghost]

2 minutes ago, handymanshandle said:

I'd wager that there's much more than tens of billions on the line. Tons of power is on the line. An entire narrative is on the line. Many, many, many, many, MANY people's entire livelihoods are on the line if the way the social media companies want to enforce this goes awry. And it will. We've seen it for the past five years what people will do to you if you don't fall in line, we'll certainly see it in how authoritative these companies wanna handle this.

And it's why I'm not really an advocate for letting private companies/corporations/whatever have full reign of speech on their site while claiming free speech. Because it can be massively distorted with enough money to shut anyone up that doesn't fall in line with them.

Yup. It's about Power & Control at this point. Everything else is just pretext. But there's two Iron Laws of the Internet: Rule 34 & Censorship will be routed around. Mostly because both will always produce a lot of money for whoever controls them.  For as much as "Big Tech" seems like it's in control, spend some time actually trying to figure out where their money comes from. When you start looking, you start to understand why all of the leadership seem to be constantly on some sort of drugs.

[Wheresmehammer]

Power and control helps to foster order, some people are not taught it from a young age so need to be taught it when older in life, so here it is.

[Wheresmehammer]

22 minutes ago, Crossbred said:

Even if there were good intentions here it would be shady. But there are not good intentions, just political ones. And it's automated censorship, which is just scary in general. No me gusta.

In your bubble.

[Crossbred]

2 minutes ago, Wheresmehammer said:

In your bubble.

What's my bubble?

[Wheresmehammer]

Just now, Crossbred said:

What's my bubble?

The fact that people are being completely ignorant of the fact that their selfish needs are influencing them to take stands, not in the interest of others and those who have the virus.

[GhostRoadieBL]

so they are looking to do it for a pandemic but not anti-vaxers, flat earthers, tabloid posts etc. Maybe this is a step in the right direction but it's tricky when their own algorithm is working against them at a fundamental purpose level. Fake news gets eyes on the page which get eyes on the ads which is their entire platform's purpose, this is at most a symbolic gesture. The vapor launch of combatting fake news

[Crossbred]

1 minute ago, Wheresmehammer said:

The fact that people are being completely ignorant of the fact that their selfish needs are influencing them to take stands, not in the interest of others and those who have the virus.

What does that have to do with my nonexistent bubble?

Literally everyone knows that people are trying to make money and gain influence through the suffering of others or without it, regardless of how much "order" there is. Welcome to Pre-Economics. The only difference that "order" produces is that the only ones who can act selfishly and get away with it are those at the top. 

Economics aside, the fact that corporations are using censorship methods that would get a government on the wrong end of a UN trial is scary to anyone who values free speech. 

It's the same reason that most world leaders did not use military force to shut in the entire population for three weeks to stop the spread of the virus: even if it were good in practice it would be incredibly wrong in principle.

[Wheresmehammer]

2 minutes ago, Crossbred said:

What does that have to do with my nonexistent bubble?

Literally everyone knows that people are trying to make money and gain influence through the suffering of others or without it, regardless of how much "order" there is. Welcome to Pre-Economics. The only difference that "order" produces is that the only ones who can act selfishly and get away with it are those at the top. 

Economics aside, the fact that corporations are using censorship methods that would get a government on the wrong end of a UN trial is scary to anyone who values free speech. 

It's the same reason that most world leaders did not use military force to shut in the entire population for three weeks to stop the spread of the virus: even if it were good in practice it would be incredibly wrong in principle.

I would rather go through hard times and become a better person for it than get out the cheap easy way and have people run over others.

 

Sometimes it's a lesson of restriction that makes us so much more grateful for what we have in life.

[poochyena]

59 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

So they're going to conspire to dictate the "correct" view on a topic

no, the science community will be. the social media companies will simply be directing people towards the science and away from fake news.

[PlayStation 2]

8 minutes ago, Wheresmehammer said:

I would rather go through hard times and become a better person for it than get out the cheap easy way and have people run over others.

 

Sometimes it's a lesson of restriction that makes us so much more grateful for what we have in life.

Other times, it's a lesson of restriction that makes you realize that we're in the dystopian future that people were warning us about in the 1950s.

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

all it took them was an year to get on this? but how can you trust the moderators? 

[Wheresmehammer]

8 minutes ago, handymanshandle said:

Other times, it's a lesson of restriction that makes you realize that we're in the dystopian future that people were warning us about in the 1950s.

Yes, but 1950 was 70 years ago.

[PlayStation 2]

1 minute ago, Wheresmehammer said:

Yes, but 1950 was 70 years ago.

It was, but history is something to learn from, not to rewrite.

[Wheresmehammer]

Just now, handymanshandle said:

It was, but history is something to learn from, not to rewrite.

History does not always repeat it's self and fearing change is a human instinct when based on lower survival instincts which is all based around the ego self.

[PlayStation 2]

3 minutes ago, Wheresmehammer said:

History does not always repeat it's self and fearing change is a human instinct when based on lower survival instincts which is all based around the ego self.

History typically doesn't repeat itself word for word, but it's pretty often that history kinda loops itself around with repeating patterns and similarities to other points of history, like an 8-track tape. 

People always want power. Pushing a specific viewpoint is an easy way to get there. Most countries and their governments have done it at some point, especially in wartime. Doesn't make it right, but what we're seeing is a little different than that, as what we're seeing is an insistence from corporate America on something being completely right and unquestionably so. When something gets to that point and the point it's on is shakey, it absolutely should be questioned.

[PCGuy_5960]

48 minutes ago, Wheresmehammer said:

Power and control helps to foster order, some people are not taught it from a young age so need to be taught it when older in life, so here it is.

...read that again, but slowly. Do you like modern day China or soviet Russia? Because that does sound an awful lot like these 2.

[Deus Voltage]

One of the very rare times that I would actually side with a tech giants. I'm not convinced by the censorship argument simply because your freedom ends when it starts with another person. Put differently, take this analogy as an example:

 

+ Create rules to limit people's freedom when driving so that they aren't reckless on the roads and cause injury.

  = Your freedom is limited to ensure the survival of others and cohesiveness of society as a whole.

 

I understand people have good intentions when they approach the censorship topic, but sometimes they miss the trees from the forest. I also understand people's suspicion of the intentions of tech giants, I wrote a painfully long thesis on it for my masters. 

 

Still, you gotta make decisions at some point, and using freedom of speech as an argument against improving the general health and cohesiveness of society is not a hill you wanna die on.

[Wheresmehammer]

Just now, PCGuy_5960 said:

...read that again, but slowly. Do you like modern day China or soviet Russia? Because that does sound an awful lot like these 2.

I don't live there so don't have an opinion without external biases.