/linked/2016/11/15/gizmodo-facebook-fake-news

Comments

anonymous:
Unwittingly, you nailed the problem. Filtering out truly fake news IS staying above the political fray. But that's not at all what this is about.

Those clamoring for a "fake news filter" are exactly the same people fearing George Bush reviving the Fairness Doctrine to limit the "liberal media."

It's clear that "fake news" really means conservative opinion, and this the left is plotting a campaign of censorship to limit the free exchange of ideas.
1:40 am — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
anonymous:
> Facebook can stay above the political fray, or they can filter out false news. They can’t do both.

Wat?

How is filtering fake news in any way incompatible with staying "above the fray"?

Gruber sounds dumber and dumber as time goes on :-/
2:26 am — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
anonymous:
> "fake news" really means conservative opinion

No; it really doesn't.

It means "fake news".
2:27 am — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
To Be Fair:
>How is filtering fake news in any way incompatible with staying "above the fray"?

Because the right-wing, particularly the alt-right, are the key purveyors of fake news.

If you had any reading comprehension, you might have gotten that.
3:05 am — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
anonymous:
Yes, let's have ((Facebook)) and ((Google)) tell us what's true, and only things deemed to be ((fact checked)) will be allowed for discussion.

Every other voice will be "fake news".
3:08 am — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
Rageous:
What's missing from all this banter about Facebook is the fact that they didn't want to roll it out UNTESTED in an election month. That would have been Comey levels of irresponsibility. There's always the obvious trash, but at what level does Facebook determine that something is actually false or misleading? You can't simply point to Snopes and call it a day (Snopes itself is demonstrably biased as well -- who fact-checks them?).
3:42 am — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
My Optional Name:
>"fake news" really means conservative opinion

>No; it really doesn't.

>It means "fake news".

AKA "Faux News". There's a reason why that's the nickname for that popular Republican propaganda cable media channel.
2:15 pm — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
My Optional Name:
(apologies... I forgot to add an extra quote "depth" for the first line in my post above)
2:18 pm — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
anonymous:
> AKA "Faux News". There's a reason why that's the nickname for that popular Republican propaganda cable media channel.

Yeah that's not what this is about though.

Fake. News.

Shit like this nonsense:
> http://denverguardian.com/2016/11/05/fbi-agent-suspected-hillary-email-leaks-found-dead-apparent-murder-suicide/

which has been pulled offline, but here is google's cached version:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:8SwdkLtda9oJ:denverguardian.com/2016/11/05/fbi-agent-suspected-hillary-email-leaks-found-dead-apparent-murder-suicide/+&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

*This* is what Facebook is supposedly ignoring in order to "stay above the fray"? That is a stupid, stupid explanation.
3:36 pm — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
Donald Clinton:
> in practice liberals don’t engage in the kind of mass rejections of evidence that conservatives do

Hahahaha. AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Good one.
3:52 pm — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
The New World Order:
Flouride! Vaccines! Sex before breakfast! The fact that the world will not end tomorrow! The future!

If it was up to Democrats humanity would still be cowering in caves.
5:16 pm — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
anonymous:
Fake News = Conservative Censorship.
8:08 pm — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
Patrick Henry, the 2nd:
"But you don’t see the kind of lockstep rejection of evidence that we see over and over again on the right. "

ROFL! Except you do. Guns, abortion, government regulations, religious freedom- you name it its LOCKSTEP. At least as lockstep as the right (which really isn't that lockstep).

The problem is Gruber is so biased he doesn't see it.
10:11 pm — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
The New World Order:
"Killing adults who have killed others is not OK. Killing unborn babies is OK because it's what Mom wants." - Democrats.
10:46 pm — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
anonymous:
"Trans people need to be humored as though they were not mentally ill. Unless you're a muslim, in which case it's okay to kill them." - Democrats.
11:00 pm — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
anonymous:
@New World Order: OK, so killing babies should be illegal because of the sanctity of human life etc, but let's go ahead and repeal the Affordable Care Act, denying insurance coverage to tens of millions of Americans, just out of spite. Got it.
11:03 pm — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
anonymous:
> Guns, abortion, government regulations, religious freedom- you name it its LOCKSTEP. At least as lockstep as the right (which really isn't that lockstep).

What do you mean by 'LOCKSTEP'? Maybe you could argue there is a 'lockstep' mindset on these topics (not sure if I'd agree with you on all of them, but you could make the case). But I think you've missed the "rejection of evidence" part? Where do you see rejection of evidence on a widespread basis on these issues?

And I don't mean a case where there might be conflicting evidence on either side of the argument; I'm looking for something like we see on the right, where people remain committed to the worldview that reducing the top marginal tax rates is always beneficial, or that climate change is a hoax?
11:06 pm — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
anonymous:
> "Trans people need to be humored as though they were not mentally ill. Unless you're a muslim, in which case it's okay to kill them." - Democrats.

WTF are you on about?
Which Democrats are saying its OK to kill muslims?
11:07 pm — Wednesday, 16 November 2016
My Optional Name:
>>AKA "Faux News". There's a reason why that's the nickname for that popular Republican propaganda cable media channel.

>Yeah that's not what this is about though.

>Fake. News.

Ooooh. You means "news" like this one...?
[Fox News apologizes for falsely reporting that Clinton faces indictment](https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/fox-news-apologizes-for-falsely-reporting-that-clinton-faces-indictment/2016/11/04/8fd56f20-a2b7-11e6-8d63-3e0a660f1f04_story.html?tid=sm_tw)

or this?

[Fox News wrongly links Republican anti-Trump protester to voter fraud](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/08/fox-news-wrongly-links-republican-anti-trump-protester-austyn-crites-to-voter)



4:41 am — Thursday, 17 November 2016
Donald Clinton:
>I'm looking for something like we see on the right, where people remain committed to the worldview that reducing the top marginal tax rates is always beneficial

He already named it: guns, abortion, government regulations, religious freedom.
8:30 am — Thursday, 17 November 2016
Donald Clinton:
This entire line of argumentation actually further underscores the arrogance of the Left that propelled Donald Trump to victory. You clowns still don't get it. Keep walking around with your smug sense of dismissive superiority.

Then, continue to be shocked by election results.
8:42 am — Thursday, 17 November 2016
My Optional Name:
>This entire line of argumentation actually further underscores the arrogance of the Left that propelled Donald Trump to victory. You clowns still don't get it. Keep walking around with your smug sense of dismissive superiority.

Clinton technically won the election by over 1 million votes, but lost thanks to this rigged system. Trump got that much right. But no worries. Trump will be impeached within a year, spearheaded by his very own party, if he doesn't step down first.
2:05 pm — Thursday, 17 November 2016
anonymous:
@Donald Clinton, good talk. Best of luck with influencing others.
2:26 pm — Thursday, 17 November 2016
Just Sayin':
But in 2012 Romney won 48% of the popular vote but 38% of the electoral vote. I didn't hear anyone on the Right bitching about the disparity then.

But boy oh boy are people on the Left bitching about it now.

Your tears sweeten my morning coffee. Cry me a fucking river.
3:32 am — Friday, 18 November 2016
anonymous:
> But boy oh boy are people on the Left bitching about it now.


?

Those two things are in no way equivalent?
4:36 am — Friday, 18 November 2016
My Optional Name:
>But in 2012 Romney won 48% of the popular vote but 38% of the electoral vote. I didn't hear anyone on the Right bitching about the disparity then.

Considering that Romney lost the electoral AND popular vote (Obama had 51.1% of popular votes to Romney's 47.2%), the Republicans didn't have a pot to piss in.
4:42 am — Friday, 18 November 2016
Donald Clinton:
>Considering that Romney lost the electoral AND popular vote (Obama had 51.1% of popular votes to Romney's 47.2%), the Republicans didn't have a pot to piss in.

Considering the Constitution spells out the electoral college, the Democrats don't have a pot to piss in right now either.

Accept it and move the fuck on.
8:37 am — Friday, 18 November 2016
Donald Clinton:
>Clinton technically won the election by over 1 million votes

No, Clinton "technically" lost the election.
8:37 am — Friday, 18 November 2016
Donald Clinton:
>@Donald Clinton, good talk. Best of luck with influencing others.

I don't need to "influence" anyone.
8:38 am — Friday, 18 November 2016
My Optional Name:
>Accept it and move the fuck on.

****gasp**** Oh he LANGUAGE coming from your nasty little mouth! Well I guess you told me.

![](http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/70/7073ff0ce9c54f6672f157ebef668c1b6bb123d15fc2e2bc062ec1558f964820.jpg)
4:01 pm — Friday, 18 November 2016
My Optional Name:
![](https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/30/94/86/309486498d4baea7580e9c4a2f82d76e.jpg)
4:03 pm — Friday, 18 November 2016
anonymous:
> I don't need to "influence" anyone.

Makes sense.
4:27 pm — Friday, 18 November 2016
My Optional Name:
I'm a moron.
7:22 am — Monday, 21 November 2016
Leave a Comment
To leave a comment, install the Safari extension!