133

Instagram posts will soon be screened by Facebook fact checkers

The amount of fake news and conspiracy theories on Facebook and Twitter is troublesome, but by no means limited to those two social media platforms. Instagram users have to deal with a fair share of general misinformation as well.

The company has already been working to reduce the reach of posts containing false information, but is now taking things one step further. Soon potentially misinforming posts will go through parent company Facebook's fact checking procedures.

Posts that are identified as false will not necessarily be removed but won't appear on the Explore page or hashtag search. Talking to Poynter, a company spokesperson said: 'Our approach to misinformation is the same as Facebook's β€” when we find misinfo, rather than remove it, we'll reduce its distribution.'

The newly introduced measures now ensure the fact checkers also find images on Instagram that have not previously been flagged on Facebook.

According to reports Instagram has been working closely with Facebook's fact checking teams since the US midterm elections. When images with misinformation are identified on Facebook, an image recognition algorithm can search for the same image on Instagram. The newly introduced measures now ensure the fact checkers also find images on Instagram that have not previously been flagged on Facebook.

According to Poynter, Instagram is also considering the option to add pop-ups that alert users who are searching for misinformation. It's good to see the platform and its parent company Facebook taking a stronger stance against misinformation in social media but for many the measures to counteract fake news and hate messages are still not going far enough.

View Comments (133)

Comments

All (133)
Most popular (15)
Editors' picks (0)
DPR staff (0)
Oldest first
Skyscape

This should be interesting, but by no means surprising. It will be funny to see what Facebook "fact checkers" deem as false information. Don't worry, there's no way personal agendas will get on the way of thier "fact checking". Hahaha. Just ask Mark Suckerberg.

1 week ago
Ionian

Considering Facebook's latest rampage where they've banned not just extremists but people like Comic book pages who dared question marvel's motives this has nothing to do with what's true or not - it has to do with social media in general doing whatever it can to silence any dissent or individual thinking so that 2016 can't happen again. I think the what ended up being the most hilarious is that leftists were outed as the true fascists.

2 weeks ago
808_freedive

Left or right has more to do with scoring low in the hierarchy. Its the same people.

2 weeks ago
Wild Bill - Polo Protog
Wild Bill - Polo Protog

Truth can be subjective. I am partially color blind. When I say something is green, or red, it is because it appears that way to me. However, to someone with full color sight, it appears differently. Just ask my wife. So, do I lie when I say something is green or red?
Describe an airplane to a person that has never seen one, and explain its function. That person will call you a liar, even though you aren't.
Political points of view are muddier. A lib: "All guns are bad, and nobody in the public should have any." A conservative: "We have the right to own guns. They are effective for personal safety."
Lib Truth: Guns have been used by people to do evil acts. Conservative Truth: Guns have been used by people to protect themselves. Both truths are correct, however it is the subjective point of view that makes each side call the other a liar.
Before judging anyone you must first drop all of your own preconceptions. Who can do that all the time?

2 weeks ago
wasTF

You dont lie when you say something is green, but you should not talk about it like its a fact. Thats the thing, nowadays everybody can/wants to be a news outlet. that is just both dangerous and a chance... but dealing with all the missinformation is hard. So if you know you might not be right about something, then shut up. That's a hard thing to do for people, which is sad.

Oh and bye the way, you can proove colors scientifically, colors are not subjective, they are just perceived subjectivly.. big difference!

2 weeks ago*
thoth22

Looks like they learned from academia how to stifle speech they don't like. How dare you think for yourself.

2 weeks ago
Mark Turney
Mark Turney

Whether right or left, no extremists should have moral authority over the speech of others. What the world must learn is to think critically, do their own research, stop listening to unchecked hype and most of all appreciate individuality and differences.

2 weeks ago
ZilverHaylide

@Mark Turney

Good advice. Unfortunately, most people have inadequate training and little practice in thinking critically. There are powerful forces that want to maintain that ignorance.

The political powers-that-be (and also aspiring politicians in the traditional mold) don't want a populace that can think critically, they want one amenable to demagoguery or at least "hot-button" pushes and easy distraction from the truly important issues.

And the economic powers-that-be (the manufacturer and service provider corporations, the advertising apparatus, the distributors, the retailers, indeed, modern capitalism itself) don't want a populace that can think critically, because a majority of the economy ultimately depends on consumer spending, and the economic powers want consumers to buy, buy, buy, irrespective of consumer need or cost/benefit. That's much easier to induce if consumers don't engage in critical thought.

2 weeks ago
ZilverHaylide

Finally, much of the modern world is just bread and circuses. (And in recent years, they've cut the bread ration, but that's a different subject). No critical thought needed or desired for circuses.

2 weeks ago
Mark Turney
Mark Turney

@ZilverHaylide - Agree 100%. Very unfortunate indeed.

2 weeks ago
Mark Turney
Mark Turney

Comedian George Carlin spoke of this problem frequently. RIP George.

2 weeks ago
ZilverHaylide

Yes, George Carlin was one of the greats.

2 weeks ago
David610

@Mark Turney

Everything in moderation, including moderation. Oscar Wilde

The middle ground is where most feel comfortable. An excess of middle thinking can be dangerous. Free speech should be allowed for those who dissent. However narrow minded bigotry should be exposed. Age and experience helps with that.

Social media has ruined stable government in my country. Politicians are now after the most likes and money for the next election campaign.

2 weeks ago
SteveY80

The situation with "grooming gangs" abusing thousands of kids in the UK was dismissed as a right wing conspiracy theory before the truth came out.

It turned out that British authorities really had been covering up the problem and trying to silence both victims and whistle-blowers.

I wonder whether discussion of that would have made it past the "fact checkers"?

2 weeks ago*
Lees Channel

Yay, censorship and media manipulation! I'm so glad that Facebook will be more proactive in shaping what people see and think online!

2 weeks ago
M Lammerse
M Lammerse

It's a serious issue which should go further than cynical comments. Facebook and Twitter more and more behave like the int. moral police of the world.

2 weeks ago
thoth22

It appears corporations are more and more just extensions of the government, not a good thing as government is already bad enough on its own.

2 weeks ago
David610

thoth22

I think you've got that the wrong way round? In most countries governments are controlled by corporations.

2 weeks ago
Christian Unger

Facebook fact checkers, yes?
This is going to be great, considering the track record of Facebook so far.
""You can put a tuxedo on a goat, but still a goat. "

2 weeks ago
Kafka2000

Where I live we say "you can put a lipstck on a pig, bit its still a pig"

2 weeks ago
killmess

Even if the monkey dress in silk, it remains a monkey (Argentina)

2 weeks ago
P10004K
P10004K

I am glad to see Facebook (Instagram) and Google (youtube) getting after all of the conspiracy nuts out there. They belong in a group home.

2 weeks ago
SjpImages

I don't know... We don't seem to be the one killing babies immediately after birth dot-dot-dot or breaking people's heads open with bike locks. I don't think we're the ones that are having autistic screaming fits in libraries all over the nation. And lastly I think we're the ones who have accepted the results of the last democratic election. I don't think you can say that about any of you nutcases at all. All this is is censorship of our first amendment rights. You fruitcakes want to take anything you don't like to hear and call it hate speech...πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚ I can't wait to see all of your faces in November of 2020!!!!

2 weeks ago
Max Iso
Max Iso

Sjp IKR, i mean when Oh'Bummer won two terms, did we see bands of conservatives with faces covered, destroying shops and cars? Nope, but we have had over 2 years of that so far. Just targeting random people, sometimes it's liberals who are victims. Violence, property damage, bullying and herd mentality all over social media and all bc they lost an election fair n square.

Meanwhile guys like P1000 up there probably don't think our laws are important. Immigration law? Nah that's more of a guideline. Fetuses? Nah they aren't even human. These people make me sick.

2 weeks ago
Gmon750

How many times does this need to be repeated? The 1st amendment only applies to government entities, and NOT private companies. Facebook/IG censoring content is no different than my kicking you out of my house for saying something I don't like.

Besides that, the rest of your post just reeks of issues.

2 weeks ago
P10004K
P10004K

Conspiracy nuts.....they're here !

2 weeks ago
Max Iso
Max Iso

Gmon, everybody knows this, we are just calling it out for what it is. The heads of these companies claim they aren't biased, yet their platforms suggest otherwise. If they just came out and said yea, we hate conservatives and we are using our platforms to support liberal ideas, then nothing to talk about.

Go watch Jack Dorsey's interview on Joe Rogan's podcast, he claims he doesn't run Twitter with any biases at all, that it's "mistakes" and "bugs" in the system. They are not considered government utilities so they are not subject to law (yet anyway) but they are subject to being called out for lying.

Ironic isn't it, that this witch hunt is supposedly based on truth, yet they can't be honest about their biases?

2 weeks ago
sludge21017
sludge21017

When will the FB fact checkers work on these forums here? There's enough fake news about cameras in these forum posts.

2 weeks ago
Kafka2000

@Gmon750
"How many times does this need to be repeated? The 1st amendment only applies to government entities, and NOT private companies."

It is not simple as it looks. Facebook is a private company but in fact it is providing a public service to push Democratic Party agenda.

2 weeks ago*
M Lammerse
M Lammerse

Not sure where I should be more afraid of...a person who tells me to believe in a certain religion and if I don't do I will burn in hell or a pea-nut who tells me that the ( or a) government wants to know everything anywhere.

That pea-nut with his goddy hellhole story can do whatever he wants, while that other pea-nut with his conspiracy problem is banned from the social henhouse.

2 weeks ago*
P10004K
P10004K

Wow , Info Wars fanboys want their conspiracy theories allowed ! The stupid movement has gone mainstream with the election of bone spur the clown .

2 weeks ago
Max Iso
Max Iso

Speaking of clowns, look at your profile pic. A real ladies man i bet...

2 weeks ago
P10004K
P10004K

@Max Iso Are you in a group home ?

2 weeks ago
Max Iso
Max Iso

Not even close, im a youthful and fit guy in my early 40s and live in my own home with my wife and kids.

2 weeks ago
Gmon750

I just laugh when people bring up the nonsense about companies like Twitter, FB, Instagram "censoring free speech". They are either being dense or uneducated. Even if private companies like Facebook are providing a "public service to push a democratic agenda", so what? Other private sites do the exact same thing, at no cost to those that go onto their website to push their Republican agenda? So what?

No one is forced to use FB. It's their site, their rules, their "agenda". Mark Zuckerberg certainly pushes a Democratic agenda, yet Zuckerberg's buddy Joel Kaplan at FB supported Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh by sitting with his family during the hearings. How can that be? There's also pro-Republican groups on Facebook as well as Democratic.

In the end, FB, Twitter, IG, whatever provides a service to the users. They don't have to like (or see) whatever content they don't agree with.

1 week ago
P10004K
P10004K

I agree, FB offered their services to both the Hillary and Trump campaigns but the Hillary people did not want it.
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/brad-parscale-trumps-2020-campaign-manager-calls-facebook-ad-policy-a-gift/

1 week ago
Dester Wallaboo
Dester Wallaboo

Who is screening the screeners screening?

2 weeks ago
Max Iso
Max Iso

No need to worry about that, it will be as clean as that time when CNN was paying the DNC head who was sneaking HRC the debate questi..... oops, um nevermind.

2 weeks ago
Gmon750

So who's screening the screeners that are supposed to screen the screeners doing the screening?

No one cares except the paranoid. Whatever agenda Zuckerberg has to promote, anything has to be better than all the garbage that is out there. I'd rather have someone trying to do something, then have everyone snide in with their grand plan and nothing happens.

1 week ago
xoio
xoio

*cough* Promoting a narrative they want you to read & only versions of the 'truth' they want you to know *cough*

2 weeks ago
ZilverHaylide

A cough, followed by another cough a bit later -- are you, by any chance, in your doctor's office receiving a hernia exam?

2 weeks ago
SjpImages

From what I can see all you have to do is turn on the TV to get fake news. why are they wasting their time with Instagram and all the people who say it like it really is? It's just more left criminality. If they don't like what you're saying and they don't have an argument against it, they just simply trying to shut you down or sensor you. There's just not enough brain power in that part of our society to have actual dialogue. Ho hum, see you all in 2020.

2 weeks ago
Songsteel

There is a real problem that these platforms are trying to solve in their own way, regardless of what your political view points might be. Not sure that people are fully aware of the chaos that happens behind the scenes at these social companies.

Destin Sandlin from "Smarter Every Day" made these very unbiased, factual interviews with some of the heads of these social platforms to discuss the problem of attacks on/through social media. I recommend everybody watch them and then make an opinion based on an actual understanding of what they are combating on a second by second basis that you don't see or pay attention too.

Intro & Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PGm8LslEb4
Twitter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-1RhQ1uuQ4
Facebook: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FY_NtO7SIrY

2 weeks ago
Kleetus

Sure, what they say sounds great. But, much like all the other programs democrats come up with, they usually do exactly the opposite of what they state. For example, everybody's favorite fascist Zuckerberg just hacked a bunch of conservative commentators off FB, but magically, none of the clowns on the left were touched. Just to add insult to injury, Kermit also tagged farrakhan as a right winger, which is probably the most retarded thing said to date.

Personally, I'm looking forward to both platforms going into the digital ash heep of history.

2 weeks ago
Max Iso
Max Iso

So if this is to remove lies and only let truth pass, does that mean all the men pretending to be women will be censored too?

2 weeks ago
McArchive

Trouble on date nights?

2 weeks ago
Max Iso
Max Iso

Typical, you choose to not actually answer the question. Formed as a joke, it has real merit and i was hoping somebody would actually offer a real response.

2 weeks ago
McArchive

a 1:2250 dilution with diafine isn't the best way forward; perhaps hc-110 @ 1:Ø and heated to 50C will help you bake better highlights...

2 weeks ago
Max Iso
Max Iso

Oh how insensitive of me, i should have read between the lines. My apologies, i didn't mean to hurt your feelings by saying your gender transition was a "lie", i was simply stating it from my POV.

2 weeks ago
McArchive

well... was it a statement, or a question you were just asking 'for a friend'?

2 weeks ago
SjpImages

Oh no way... That's hate speech! If you say anything that goes against what they believe it's hate speech what should be silenced immediately!!! πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚

Let them play their little kid game....They're all mentally deficient from all the drugs (vaccines) and even more screwed up by the engineered schooling (indoctrination).

We have engineered as a human species and entire generation of autistic, psychopathic, extremely sick children. They call themselves...........(wait for it) PROGRESSIVES.

πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚

2 weeks ago
SjpImages

Oh no way... That's hate speech! If you say anything that goes against what they believe it's hate speech what should be silenced immediately!!! πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚

Let them play their little kid game....They're all mentally deficient from all the drugs (vaccines) and even more screwed up by the engineered schooling (indoctrination).

We have engineered as a human species and entire generation of autistic, psychopathic, extremely sick children. They call themselves...........(wait for it) PROGRESSIVES.

πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚

2 weeks ago
Max Iso
Max Iso

@Archive, im just wondering if you guys will even try to hide the double standards or if you have given up the act yet.

@Sjp, i get the feeling they are trying to silence anything that might help Trump in 2020, but they are too late, the damage is done. It will be interesting to see how much they self destruct by 2024, we might not have a left left by then :) . Heck if you really think about it, by 2050, all these abortions might rid us entirely of the inferior genes the left would have been passing on.

Fingers crossed anyway.

2 weeks ago
mxx
mxx

Censorship? The irony is that these days, more than ever in history, we have the tools at our disposal to discern fake from real.

2 weeks ago
Hard Truth

What will the right wing posters do now? Complain when their typical dishonest posts gets deleted I guess.

2 weeks ago
ZilverHaylide

For the record: I'm unabashedly left wing, and I don't like censorship.

You shouldn't either, whether left or right.

Censorship of "disruptive" ideas could, in this country, easily be construed to encompass censorship of advocacy for worker rights, a livable wage, medicare for all, affordable college, environmental protection, racial equality, civil liberties, a halt to police brutality, a significant reduction in military spending and foreign adventurism, and much more.

2 weeks ago*
Max Iso
Max Iso

Zilver don't be silly, nobody on the left worries about worker's wages, they are too busy picketing to increase their welfare. Kidding aside, this is so obviously happening bc the dems think Trump won due to social media countering the lies of the left.

This isn't a way to remove fake news, it's a way to censor anything that isn't pro liberal. Take for example the HRC debates where CNN cheated and gave her the questions. Clearly against the rules of our election, clearly a true story.

If i had a IG or FB account and posted about that "incident", i'd bet my post would get flagged, deleted, and my account would be banned, even though it really did happen. This is nothing more than a way to silence the opposition through force, also known as fascism.

And you are right, it's a slippery slope, if power shifts and this kind of censorship is in place, it could be used against anybody.

2 weeks ago
davev8
davev8

Hard truth ...what is a typical dishonest post that the right post about ...can you give me some actual examples???that can be verified ... if its a typical thing should not be hard to do ...i find the left tend to make statements that infer they have the moral high ground ....but normanly no facts to back up what they say..bearing in mind the word Typical could be used instead of mostly

2 weeks ago
Hard Truth

Moral high ground? Well everyone knows the right always claim to have cornered the market on morals. That's why when they get exposed doing immoral things its such big news.

2 weeks ago
davev8
davev8

i was in a rush when i posted ..i was also going to put ...likely to side step and not answer and use straw man arguments

2 weeks ago
Max Iso
Max Iso

Hey Truth, you might not want to use the word "they" when somebody does something bad, im part of the right and i have had nothing to do with whoever you are talking about.

And yes, if we are judging each side as a whole, the right is FAR more likely to be morally decent. Unless you think the vast majority of prison inmates vote Trump? Haaaaa i made a joke there... Why do you think liberals are so insistent on more lenient sentences? Because criminals are far more likely to be part of the left.

Then there's baby killing, which isn't considered a crime but it should be. It's laughable that anybody from the left would even bring up the moral argument.

2 weeks ago
dan_darkroom

Does that mean no more flat earth, NASA is fake, moon landing hoax, anti vax, evil canola page?

LIKE

2 weeks ago
Aroart

Just about everything from the Bible, history and even science is some sort of distortion of truth from the writer.. Math is the only truth to the human race.. Will they also ban selfie filters ... Hey, why not go to the whole truth...

2 weeks ago
Wild Bill - Polo Protog
Wild Bill - Polo Protog

Well that should remove all the posts by Pelosi, Durban, the Clintons, AOC, etc.

2 weeks ago
Kafka2000

Some ? 99.9% of their post fits fake news category.

2 weeks ago
Christoph65

It’s way past time. It will be easy for Trump. Everything he says will be marked false

3 weeks ago
Thematic

CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS as well.

2 weeks ago
Josh683

Bad news for DPReview if they plan on posting their thoughts on EM1X on FB

3 weeks ago*
Karl Huber

And who is going to be screening the Facebook fact checkers?

3 weeks ago
Rob-in-Alberta

The Democratic Party

3 weeks ago
ttran88
ttran88

If you don't like what they are doing, don't use their services. Simple!

3 weeks ago
Zdman

Precisely what might happen if it starts to interfere too much with day to day usage. Nobody is too big to fall.

2 weeks ago
The Name is Bond

All your views are belong to facebook.

3 weeks ago
Marcus Sundman
Marcus Sundman

90% of ads on instagram are scams, and most are just copies of the same one, so clearly instagram has zero problem with lying to, cheating, and scammings its users. And now they will also start filtering truth. Just great...

3 weeks ago*
ZilverHaylide

Too many know everything about the Kardashians but nothing about history.

It's important to not conflate the various motivations for information suppression, they are distinct and very different -- while yet all working together to bring about fascism.

Amongst the populace, some are flat-out ignorant of history. Others might not be, but want "stability" and avoidance of the "troublesome" so much that they are willing to tolerate authoritarianism, in whatever form it may take. Some are outright supporters of authoritarianism. And yet others take it one or more steps further and are willing to be its lackeys and even enforcers. Finally, there are those at the top of the power pyramid, they know exactly what they are doing and what they want -- and it ain't my well-being, or yours, whatever their accompanying rhetoric may be.

3 weeks ago
photoaddict

It's hilarious how people think this is censorship or ministry of truth when in reality, the bigger issue is the misinformation being spread all over the internet passing as "truth" when they have not bothered to verify the data leading people to make wrong decisions based on misinformation. The big problem is how people want to believe their own biases than to believe what data shows.

I'd rather have facts, not hocus pocus, pseudoscience, fake news, and so on.

3 weeks ago
ClosePhoto

So is your concern is about other, less intelligent people being manipulated, or are you including yourself in the group who can't apply critical thinking and verify information for themselves requiring this corporation to be a truth filter?

3 weeks ago*
Anders_Nilsson

No, the problem is not about misinformation, the problem is about us having raised a generation that lacks critical thinking. This has been done to make the population easier to rule.

3 weeks ago
Zdman

So let them filter the news for you then and you can continue to believe in your own biases. The only chance you can tell the truth from the lies is to have the truth presented with the lies because their is no full truth or lie and there's a little each in the other.

2 weeks ago
Kleetus

Did you believe the news when they told you for two years Trump colluded with the Russians and tried to cover it up?

No of course not, that would be stupid...

2 weeks ago
ZilverHaylide

@Anders_Nilsson

I agree that we have a generation that lacks critical thinking ability. But it's not only one generation, it's been the case for many.

And I agree that it has been done to make the population easier to rule. But it's not only about rule in the political sense, but also in an economic one. In the U.S., 2/3 of economic activity is consumer spending. If consumers were rational and asked themselves about each purchase whether they will derive benefits from it commensurate with the money paid or debt incurred, they might reconsider. Modern capitalism doesn't want rational consumers, it wants them to buy, buy, buy, irrespective of need or cost/benefit. That's much easier to induce if consumers aren't rational, indeed perhaps aren't even capable of serious rational thought because they haven't been trained in it or had much practice doing it.

2 weeks ago*
J A C S
J A C S

The Ministry Of Truth... Is it 1984 already?

3 weeks ago
CaPi

Its more of the problem of hate speech and aggression

3 weeks ago*
J A C S
J A C S

I see, it is...

3 weeks ago*
cosinaphile

censorship is a phase of sickness every evolving fascist society passes thru

later only one type of thinking will be on view

3 weeks ago
CaPi

looking at what is posted every day I wouldnt know if this is about politics or ideology

3 weeks ago*
cosinaphile

politics is ideology ...... freeing yourself from both leads to a type of enlightenment most people are either too stupid or too compliant to ever experience.... others inwardly feel they lack the cognitive apparatus to judge the merits of what controls our lives and leap to the bandwgon that feels best emotionally ..... bullies and nasty arrogant folks who overvalue themselves drift in one direction ..... those who cannot help but endlessly rescue kittens .... in another

3 weeks ago*
Gmon750

But what happened to all that AI that apparently is in place to take care of this.

Nothing can take the place in this area as a human can. However, I wonder what their criteria is to delete stories/posts. Obvious fake news is easy to catch, but there is plenty of other filth by folks with agendas and are not necessarily true, but also are not necessarily false. It's a matter of perspective. It will be interesting to see how those are handled (if they even are) and whether they are accused of leaning left or right.

3 weeks ago
sjaxkingpin

The solution to this is not complicated. If you don't like their censorship, stop using those platforms.

Be glad the US offers enough freedom that these people are free to show how petty and closed minded they are and take your business elsewhere.

3 weeks ago
techjedi
techjedi

True, but we could also voice our concerns while these measures are being considered in a reasonable and mature manner so that hopefully they can find a solution that doesn't equate to centralized censorship.

Leaving the platform is a valid solution, but one shouldn't just quit something they have invested into at the first sign of an announced change.

3 weeks ago
ClosePhoto

Right, and if you don't like the high price of fuel, you can take your business away from Standard Oil. Facebook is a defacto monopoly, operating what amounts to a modern day public square. And if they are going to get into the information control business with their "editors", than they need to be held liable for absolutely everything on their platform, criminally and civilly. They are no longer an immune "common carrier" like the phone company, but a publisher. The only content they should remove is that which violates the law, because at least the public has some say in determining what criteria that includes. If there is fraud through misrepresentation, manipulation by foreign powers, or campaigns masquerading as something else to avoid campaign finance laws, then call in law enforcement.

3 weeks ago*
K e n n e t h

Who watches The Watchers?

They can’t be completely neutral

πŸ€”

There will be winners and there will be losers

And Zuck gets to decide who gets a voice and who gets squelched

You can’t censor a certain point of view without infringing on someone’s Freedom of Speech

3 weeks ago
ClosePhoto

Enough with the shallow thinking "private company" trope. When a "private company" is the de facto owner of the "public square", the 1st Amendment applies. This is backed by legal precedent. When many people lived in company towns, rules restricting speech were being imposed by corporations, as they owned the town hall. This was repeatedly ruled as unconstitutional.

3 weeks ago
MikeFairbanks

That then requires government regulation, which has it's pros and cons. Since we now live in a time of "alternative facts" it's going to be difficult to find a neutral party. Even if we find a neutral party they'll be labeled left or right as soon as they make a decision that one side doesn't want to hear.

You could stand on the deck of the Santa Maria with books and charts showing the earth is a sphere and many of the sailors would still refuse to admit it, partially because of pride. They'd rather be dead than wrong.

We haven't evolved since then. In fact, proof that we haven't evolved since then is the fact that so many people don't believe we evolved at all. They don't want to hear the facts or look at the science. They want to believe something they can't be proven. They prefer fake news.

3 weeks ago*
MikeFairbanks

Instagram needs to set up an algorithm that temporarily suspends accounts that frequently unfollow other users.

Yes, we all will unfollow an account occasionally because it offends or whatever, but some people follow others and then, once followed back, then unfollow the person they snatched. It's a really low-class practice that is ruining the person-to-person experience.

3 weeks ago
techjedi
techjedi

Those are bots run by paid social media influencing support companies. They use published API's from IG that already have governed limits on numbers of follows/unfollows per day. I agree the behavior kind of sucks and it needs improvement, but its unfortunately a by-product of the automation they want people to use.

Specifically, the only reason those bots even unfollow anyone is that there is a limit on the number of follows per day. Unfollowing frees up those follow slots. Further, one account can only follow 7500 accounts, but can have unlimited followers. So they get into a game of cycling through follows just to attract follow-back.

Its shallow and cheesy, but at the end of the day, accounts with many followers can be paid as influencers. Its business.

3 weeks ago
Don Mario

could FB scan themselves in the first place, please?

3 weeks ago
NJOceanView

Given how pathetically poor FB is at identifying misinformation, I don't have a lot of confidence in this.

3 weeks ago
McArchive

The "oops, we won't do that again, honest," department is back up and running?

3 weeks ago
anyway

"rather than remove it, we'll reduce its distribution".

Are they trying to say there's a difference between deleting a post and not showing it to anyone…

3 weeks ago
sts2
sts2

Gonna party like it's Nineteen Eighty-Four

3 weeks ago
ClosePhoto

Terrific, I've always wanted some unaccountable external body determining what is, and isn't factual on my behalf. It's easier than critical thinking, and of course there's no room whatsoever for bias to creep into that process, right? I can lay out a series of facts, and by careful manipulation still lie to you all day long.

If you don't understand how this manipulation can take place, search for "Washington Post’s 10,000 Trump untruths is about 25% fake news" to see clear examples of "fact checking" abuse.

3 weeks ago*
NowHearThis
NowHearThis

I agree, let the information be out there and let people do their own research and decide. People get lazy by letting others decide what information should get. No thanks, I prefer to exercise my brain.

3 weeks ago
ClosePhoto

@NowHearThis I agree completely. The people who are comfortable with "fact checking" seem to do so in the belief that the risk presented by centralized control of information is worth it to prevent someone else from being manipulated (and therefore voting the "wrong" way). Not themselves, of course, they're too smart to be manipulated, but ironically they believe it's worth letting a few corporations decide what can and cannot be seen in order to protect "progress".

3 weeks ago*
jnd

I don't want to judge the Facebook/Instagram policy on this but look at the whole problem of fake news/media manipulation/how you want to call it: In the internet age it's very simple and very cheap to spread any information you like. Which often includes outright lies, deceit and targeted manipulation.

The core problem here is that most people will not have the time or not even feel the need to fact check everything they read or see on TV. It's not practical - you would have to spend much more time searching the sources and origins than reading one maybe questionable paragraph of text. Then also all damage is done when it's published, all later corrections and retraction are lost and ineffective.

Also realize that making arguments to prove something false and make the person believe you instead of some article takes much more effort than well crafted manipulation using psychology tricks, targeting your emotions and beliefs. It's hard to counter it with logic. See anti vaccination.

3 weeks ago
ClosePhoto

You're advocating to place unquestioning trust in who? Someone with "fact checker" in their title? Many "facts" are in dispute, then what?

We're not talking about merely labeling information as questionable, but handing over the power to completely censor as they see fit. Do you understand that's far more dangerous than misinformation, which can at least be countered?

3 weeks ago
Michael - Visual Pursuit

Censors, they are called censors.

3 weeks ago
Horshack

Considering 500 Million people use Instagram every day, Facebook's "fact checkers" is most certainly a computer algorithm that is monitored by maybe a handful of humans.

3 weeks ago
techjedi
techjedi

And as we saw already, Facebook's algorithm was heavily influenced by the biases of those handful of "monitors".

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

The algorithm will never be perfect, and its the last mile of curators that ruin any concept of algorithmic objectivity.

3 weeks ago*
ZeBebito
ZeBebito

They should start by checking the massive amount of fake/crap stuff featured on their millions of ads.

3 weeks ago
Marcus Sundman
Marcus Sundman

Indeed. I report over 30 scam ads/day. I recognize these scam ads in a second, as would anyone else with at least half a brain. Clearly instagram is fine with scamming its users, so there's no way on earth that their censorship filter would be for the benefit of the users.

3 weeks ago
ZeBebito
ZeBebito

And the amount of crap is insane, like one ad per every 5 pictures lol.

3 weeks ago
Photo_Genius

Why is there politics on Instagram at all? It was supposed to be just about photography. Now people have to spread their politics everywhere including photography platforms.

3 weeks ago
MikeFairbanks

They stunk up Tik Tok as well. Most of the trolls are on a certain side of the political spectrum and constantly feel the need to have a fit online. They insult and threaten others, then turn around an act shocked when they get banned.

3 weeks ago
Nikon1977k

To MikeFairbanks,

I have been banned from DPReview a few times, despite never threatening anyone...to some, hate speech is merely speech they disagree with....censoring speech is a dangerous path.

3 weeks ago
MikeFairbanks

Nilon1977K: People aren't just banned for making threats. That's an obvious violation of rules. But civility is also a rule many ignore.

Labeling someone as something they never self-identified is an example. People call someone a communist and then wonder why they were banned. It's a violation of the rules.

If the person identifies himself as a communist then, sure, call them one. But often people publicly label each other and think it's okay because, well, they just believe it's true.

And, of course, there's the standard name calling (idiot, fool, etc.) that is also a violation of the terms of service. Finally, there is pushing a political agenda in areas that are unrelated. This DP Review post is obviously based on some politics, so there is wiggle room in the discussion.

But sometimes someone will post a salty political comment in a discussion that isn't political, and they find themselves "mysteriously" banned.

2 weeks ago
Retzius
Retzius

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

3 weeks ago
McArchive

...and gets fresh skid marks with every lap.

3 weeks ago
xPhoenix
xPhoenix

Yeah, I'm sure these "fact checkers" will be unbiased and trustworthy, LOL. IG is trash, just like FB.

3 weeks ago
Blanche Bovine

Someone said they are opening a Starbucks on Mars. Could this be fake news?

3 weeks ago
McArchive

no, there's a picture.

3 weeks ago
shigzeo
shigzeo

Facts are not true or false in the abstract. Facts change, or are updated. Fake today or yesterday may be true tomorrow. The converse may also be true. And those that arbitrate facts determine facts.

Unbiased observers as editors do not exist. This is censorship plain and simple.

3 weeks ago
Nikon1977k

to shigzeo...you HAVE to be a liberal, you see all data and facts as fluid. Facts to not change, however, perspective does. Example, people today tend to believe that Americans putting men on the moon was a "human" achievement. I am 57, and I donated pennies to NASA in elementary school in the 1960's though fund drives. American tax dollars and America funded NASA...this is an American achievement, this is a fact...time and perspective attempt to change the interpretation of the fact.

3 weeks ago
shigzeo
shigzeo

Facts are 100% about perspective.

When I was a kid, Tyrannosaurus rex stood halfway between the tame-looking upright thing of the 1950s and the forward-canting thing of Jurassic park. Today it has hair and is even more aggressive.

The bones are the same. Tomorrow it may be something different.

Facts are nothing.

My being or not being a big or small L liberal is immaterial to that bit of information. We are watching the past being re written or erased because of a certain perspective pushing this way or that or reacting to icky things that it can’t accept and which it can’t ideologically protect.

3 weeks ago
MikeFairbanks

Shigzeo: It's definitely perspective. For example, in the 1900s the Southern States attempted (and were relatively successful) in rewriting history by building monuments to the Confederacy several decades after the Civil War ended (aka the War of Southern Treason).

Now that people want to remove those pieces of propaganda (the statues) they are being told they are trying to rewrite history. Actually they are attempting to set the record straight.

3 weeks ago
Dragonrider
Dragonrider

@ Shigzeo. You are confused as to the definition of facts. You say the bones are the same. That is because the bones are the only FACTS in your example. Everything else is theory, and yes, theories are fluid, but they are NOT facts. You may not be a liberal, but the practice of relabeling theories as facts is a practice that liberals seem revel in. 45 years ago, we were going into an ice age. Now we are going to boil. Both projections are based on theories, not facts.

3 weeks ago
Nikon1977k

To MikeFairbanks.

Most people cringe when we see regimes in the Mid-East destroy iconic, historic monuments, yet in the Republic of The United States of America, those who tear down, iconic, historic monuments, are lauded.

And referring to the photographic aspect of this article (which insinuates that likes and shares are influenced by fake news), I am concerned anytime anyone indicates they will curate speech.

3 weeks ago
Nikon1977k

To Shigzeo,

I grew up in the 70's, considered Archaeology as a vocation, studied it at length through school. I had always understood the Tyrannosaurus to be a scavenger, which makes sense due to its small forearms. The "hair" you mention from the documentary franchise "Jurassic Park" was the result of genetic engineering, as was the overly-aggressiveness. Yes, we have found better fossil records and understand that some dinosaurs may have had feathers, or in fact "hair" or "hair-like structures), but the facts have not changed....our technology and understanding has changed/improved, the dinosaur is still a dinosaur.

3 weeks ago
Gmon750

Shigzeo: "Alternative facts" are not facts. Substitute "truth" for "facts". Is something true or not. It's really that simple.

Something that is today, that can change tomorrow is not the same thing. A bone today can be a petrified stone in a million years. That fact is, it still is (or was) a bone. True. Theories/opinions are not true or false, just an opinion to be further refined until it eventurally because true or false.

Pushing an opinion as the truth, when believing so is ignorant, and knowing so is a called a "lie".

This is where the difficulty in screening posts/stories is apparent. Someone can post a piece that technically is not true, but also may not technically be false, and this comes down to perspective. Politics is a perfect (and abused) example where people cherry-pick the most minute details and publish it as fact. Yes, a person said that quote but taken out of context. True and False. How will those be handled?

3 weeks ago
shigzeo
shigzeo

@gmon

β€œPushing an opinion as the truth, when believing so is ignorant, and knowing so is a called a "lie".”

My opinion is that the sky is blue, which I also believe, and I know it is an opinion. It isn’t a lie. From an observational aspect it is both true and untrue or jives with reality from a temporal perspective as well as from an absolute one: that above the clouds or the weather that I observe, there exists a blue sky.

My opinion is true. Science today will have an explanation about the reality of that β€˜blue’ and you and I may debate the reality of an on/off truth when the sky obviously can blue or black or cloudy, and yet those opinions are also fact- temporary or otherwise.

The idea that opinions and facts are mutually exclusive is too simple and obviously wrong. They both coincide with reality and coincide with unreality; and accepted facts change from age to age and people will die defending them.

3 weeks ago
KInfinity

They should just let dpreview forum commenters figure out the truth.

3 weeks ago
cosinaphile

yes and everyone else and leave censorship behind

3 weeks ago
ClosePhoto

I guess you welcome some unelected, unaccountable body determining what is, and isn't factual on your behalf. Easier than critical thinking.

3 weeks ago