After I watched Kavanaugh's testimony, I lost faith in the meaning of "Sworn Under Oath ". He lied in the Senate and the world to see. Kavanaugh responded to senator's question regarding his year book writing, he said, " Devil Triangle, drinking game ", " Boff, flatulence ". Really. He lied under oath and attempted to minimize the sexual connotation of his own writing in particular when he was drunk.
The GOP allows a dishonest person to be in Supreme Court, McConnoll spills out the opposition party as " Mob ", and Trump have more than 5000 lies or disinformation since he comes into office, it appears to me there is no bottom.
What is left is to vote your conscience in Nov 6.
14
This article pretends that these fake news accounts spread by made up people are all 'right wing' lies. I've seen both parties disparage the other with fake news, including Pelosi herself (she said 'everyone' does it; somehow that makes it okay).
The truth is that you cannot believe everything you read. That was true before the Internet, FB, twitter, etc. Anyone that reacts to some shared nonsense from one of these media outlets needs to have their head examined (any probably shouldn't vote). Again, if it sounds outrageous, there is probably more to the story. Even if it's Trump saying it.
4
Reading this and other reports like it over the last few years, I cannot help but wonder if we are not asking the most important question of all: are we seeing cracks in and potential collapse of the foundation of the American democratic experience?
10
The shift toward domestic disinformation raises potential free speech issues when Facebook and Twitter find and curtail such accounts that originate in the United States, an issue that may be sensitive before the midterms. “These networks are trying to manipulate people by manufacturing consensus — that’s crossing the line over free speech,” said Ryan Fox, a co-founder of New Knowledge, a firm that tracks disinformation…
… “If you look at volume, the majority of the information operations we see are domestic actors,” said Nathaniel Gleicher, Facebook’s head of security. He added that the company was struggling with taking down the domestic networks because of the blurry lines between free speech and disinformation…
___
Then there's the MSM and NO mention of the misleading and disinformation being promulgated by the Left-wing.
Like a hurricane, some of most destructive winds circle counterclockwise.
3
Sue the damned fakers for defamation and/threatening actions. Making malicious statement that are lies cannot be protected speech. Where is Anonymous when they should be out their taking care of people like this.
5
Facebook could easily stem the flow of disinformation by admitting it is a publisher and therefore responsible for the content on its site. Free speech protections apply to government entities, not to private industry. Facebook can set whatever content standard it chooses. But in the interest of maintaining the largest possible ad-revenue generating audience, it refuses to alienate the (sadly) sizable user population that gobbles up divisive content.
9
Simply: Ban all political news during the months of election campaigns! FACEBOOK: Just do it!
6
Facebook is a false internet within the real internet, like a locked room within a larger house. A secret password is required to get into the room, and when you enter you are subject to whatever the room may want to do to manipulate and exploit you. Enough time in the room and you will forget about the world outside. It is a room that should be removed from the house and turned into an outbuilding in the back yard, for those who want to venture there, so the rest of us in the house can be left alone.
7
It just shows that American media is barking on the wrong tree. Problem is not Russians, right-wing or left-wing, problem is Americans who believe the Internet sources more than they believe the American official media and the American politicians. Of course, there always will be people who love to believe what they want to believe and usually it is not a problem, but when the number of such people grew so big that it starts affect the election, the question should be why? Why American media and American politicians lost trust of Americans and what they could do to win this trust back?
4
For me and my house, the solution to this travesty is simple: We totally ignore and discount anything and everything that appears in social media that purveys a political opinion of any sort. In essence social media has lost its ability to influence me, almost in any direction -- and this includes all ads which we also studiously ignore. Ultimately, Social media will fade into meaninglessness, if it hasn't already. Too much garbage for anyone's time. Ho Hum, back to print media, where sources are generally obvious, whether believable or not is another issue. We are in a time of distrust of most media, and rightly so, it is so banal and ridiculous, unless verified, somehow. The NYT, WaPo and other such stalwarts are the exceptions that prove the rule. What's next will probably be even worse, as we founder in too much of almost everything, except objectivity, proven facts, and empiricism. The rest is a cross between eye candy and fluff, some insidious; some venal; some absurd. Toss all that and return to basics, say we! Social media is deadly and dead; it just doesn't know it, yet.
6
When contacted Mr. Hawkins denied any involvement. Is there any reason to believe a single thing that he has to say?
2
@Chuck Burton
Why should we believe anything facebook has to say?
3
Just start printing the addresses of these people and I suspect the problem will go away.
I find the false equivalence in this article to be so transparent as to be laughable. You include the figure of "559 pages and 221 accounts run by Americans" identified by FB as containing misleading content. You carefully select a right-wing site to discuss in depth (quite appropriately) and make mention of two left-wing pages for "balance." What would be informative would be a breakdown of the pages and accounts by "left wing" and "right wing." I have a sneaking suspicion that these figures would reveal that there is nothing even approaching "equivalency" in the numbers for each category. Tell the full story and paint a complete picture, please. Inquiring minds want to know.
9
It is baffling that in a country with maybe the best press in the world, with online access to the best information in the world, people would still find their news and opinions in obscure Facebook groups and websites the background of which they know nothing about. Why on Earth would you ever believe a single fact from these? Even Fox News that is not an example of journalist integrity would at least try quite hard to fact-check what they are saying.
It is easy to mistake the idea that you should always put into question what you read and that press outlets are biased (a realization that most people get in their teenage years, so don’t get so proud about it), with the idea that there is no point reading them. Yet when people move out of outlets of which the business model actually depends on credibility and trust, towards so-called “independent” outlets, you just have the perfect environment for all sorts of manipulators, from the greedy ones who would flatter people’s base instincts for ad revenues to home-grown and foreign manipulators for whom the press is just a mean to a political or geo-political aim (rarely anything pretty).
And that is the kind of damage that Trump does when normalizing the idea that most of the press is no better than Russia’s propaganda outlets, and that they are just a bunch of idiots out to get him. He might not like what they are saying, they might even be very wrong sometimes, but he should remember that a society without them is pretty grim.
1
Um, let's see... log discussion of disinformation campaign from Right Wing Media, no discussion of any information from any left-wing site, but FB has taken Resistance and Reverb News down, and "balanced" reporting says "right and left".
If you come over and punch me in the face, the correct description is not "two people had a fight".
4
@Joshua Freeman question everything, believe little, question motives. I believe the majority on both sides have the good of the country in their hearts but we are like sheep easily led down the garden path.
1
There is no separation between Right Wing News/communist practices and tactics and the republican party. It is a monolithic thing the republican/Conservative/Right Wing movement and has been for half a century.
They hate the United States of America with every fiber of their beings and will stop at noting in their effort to destroy it and all that it stands for. You cannot be engaged in this level of dishonesty and manipulation and honestly claim to be a patriot to this nation or to respect the founding principles which your every deed is meant to undermine if not outright destroy.
I have said for years they are basically communists and today we have an article in the Guardian in which two of them admit it. OK they are running a typical republican communistic scam but they do claim to be communists. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/oct/12/arizona-republicans-comm...
Whether they know it or not republicans have been communists in relation to our system for a half century at least. At least two of them are finally admitting to it.
Well, "Surprise, surprise, surprise" as Gomer Pyle used to say.
Now on Friday, some are saying on the "Times" and in these times, that "The sun also rises" or this looks like a "Good Friday".
But talking about domestic "disinformation":
"Domestic disinformation is harder to root out than foreign disinformation, researchers said, because in many cases it mirrors genuine networks of Americans engaging in free speech online."
What this Friday looks like to me is a modernized version of Charles E. Mitchell walking to the the center of the NYSE floor and spiking the market with futures disinformation electronically in a computerized voice like "Watson" and in "internet time", instead of the old style shouting-out of his buy orders in a loud human voice.
In terms of whether whatever is going on works, I would defer to Emperor Trump's oft quoted comment: "We'll see what happens"
2
Of the rights listed in the first amendment, why does freedom of speech seem to be more sacrosanct, particularly when it comes to opinion or political speech? The first amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
And yet, we have laws regarding the separation of church and state, local governments often require notice and approval prior to demonstrations, demonstrators are often limited as to where they can demonstrate, there are libel laws for the press. Why not truth and facts and the abolishment of hate in speech?
Truth in advertising is required for products, why not pursued in political advertising? Why can't speech be limited if it is lies and propaganda? Facts can be determined. And why is money free speech? What does money have to do with it? A candidate in Britain is not allowed to lie about an opponent. The candidate who lies is tossed out of the contest. This can be done.
I don't understand why there are few if any boundaries on free speech, but there are boundaries on other areas of the first amendment. Why is free speech allowed to be so contorted?
2
@WJLynam
First "hate speech" is a perceived thing not an actual real thing. You cannot legislate what people perceive. The very concept is an assertion that you can read minds.
Now we used to regulate speech properly here but the media have been suborned in recent decades with a false British definition of free speech that as Americans we always understood to be very wrong. We used to use our language correctly and applied it correctly so that regardless of who you were or what you claimed you meant, you were held to account for the actual words spoken. Now everyone walks around pretending to be mind readers and to know what you really meant and well that makes it impossible to have standards you only have to watch the president El Trumpo talk to know this. He will literally say opposing things in the same sentence and the people before him do not question it.
A perfect example would be the Gawker site. It was to all sensible people abusing free speech to cause harm to people who could not afford to hold them to account and draw attention to itself to make money. They were held to account by someone they victimized joining forces with someone else they victimized.
The press whined about that and how it meant they were in danger instead of pointing out how dangerous it was that millionaire never mind a regular average working person had no ability to hold any Press outlet to account even for such obviously wrongs as Mr Bollea sued over.
4
The United States of America, has been intervening, influencing elections around the world. In Latin America this has been common practice. Look, until some years ago Latin America had several elected leftist governments. Now... only two are left. The United States of America has dumped millions of dollars to influence those elections, including USA based NGOs are doing the dirty job, of “changing” people’s minds.
4
@RBR
The difference in most cases where republicans are not involved, the US promotes truth and reason.
What is going on here is typical republican dishonesty.
@RBR What you say is true. There is a joke going around Latin America --
Question:
Why has there never been a military coupe in the United States?
Answer:
Because there is no U.S. Embassy in the United States.
The CIA is notorious for having set up fake organizations as a cover for their operations. And it continues to this day. Calling out Russia for interfering with U.S. elections is like the pot calling the kettle black. When will the American public wake up?
2
Hopefully the Democrats are using every single tactic and trick in this book and are working twice as hard as the Republicans and their radical right wing fellow travelers. Vote them all out!
Heck, USA Today gave a prominent American a pulpit fir a disinformation campaign. I guess on a positive note, it was signed.
5
Possible fix: Shutdown Facebook six months before every national election and/or fine them 100 million dollars for every fake site.
8
So how does a society combat the spread of disinformation where the freedom to spread lies is protected? There is no law against being an idiot or a fascist. People will read what is in front of their nose and will believe what they want to believe.
IMO the key is energization. The masses of people that believe in truth, human rights, science and freedom of the press is somewhere around 60%. In short we must exercise our citizenry rights and duties like we do our body.
The deplorables will win when we let them; as we did in 2016. The deplorable can't be taken lightly, we can't assume they'll lose elections if we sit on the couch. That said an organized campaign to get people into the voting booths is the ultimate remedy to this plague of deplorables.
4
Lie, cheat, steal - the lazy Robber Baron way.
The crime is that so many otherwise reasonable people believe the lies and fall victim to the fear-anger-hate the Robber Barons and their radical religion brethren are spreading.
1
When a stock analyst appears on TV to tout a stock, a full disclosure box appears on the screen: whether the analyst owns the stock, his family owns the stock, the broker he works for owns the stock or has investment banking relations, etc.
Can Facebook demand full disclosure as well? How about a footnote for each page of "news" such as this one.
During the past 300 days, this source has made no public corrections or retractions of its statements. Readers should be aware that such a dearth of corrections or retractions is consistent with hearsay relaying outfits whose statements may not be credible.
Just look at a pack of cigarettes for a punchier line to make the media a healthier environment. Full Disclosure: This statement was written by a retired stock analyst and a former smoker.
2
I've read various comments that suggest Facebook should be "shut down" in some way. Most are being posted by Americans. Some speak of censorship, threats to freedom of speech (according to their personal interpretations) and similar injustices. These would be a concern if Facebook were a government agency, but it is not.
Facebook is a private entity and, as such, operates according to its own dictates. It is also international in scope, with millions of users who aren't American. In fact, there are more Facebookers in India than in the US, by a long way. Out of its 2.23 billion users, only 210 million are from the US (www.statista.com). So how is it reasonable to shut down a global medium in order to satisfy a minority of its voluntary population? This would seem rather draconian.
Many of us aren't consumed by American politics; we pay attention, but not through Facebook groups. We're there to interact with peers around the world - at no long-distance cost. As a poet, astrophotographer, music lover, history buff and science follower, I belong to FB groups which focus on these interests and link the folks who engage in them. We share some of our work with those who appreciate it. We get to chat in the process. We're not the enemy here, so why would anyone think that depriving us of our social medium would be a fair reaction to the disinformation plague?
The USA isn't the world. And each individual must exercise vigilance across the Net. That's our own responsibility.
7
You do not need to shutdown Facebook globally but just like the Chinese we can set control rules were they could be shutdown prior to elections and based upon the fact that they are part of the problem we need to hold them accountable if we do want to somehow protect our election systems.
5
The damage that FB has done to some OTHER countries has been even worse than what it's done to America.
It is a disinformation scourge.
4
Facebook should be shut down. It's amazing how many people get their news from there. It should be called Fakebook.
2
@Chris I the issue isn't Facebook per se. I get news from Facebook as well. I do so by following NPR. the NY Times, The Washington Post, The Guardian, The Economist, and The Independent among others. I am not reading, or sharing, manufactured stories. The issue is human beings with no critical thinking skills who implicitly trust that when Uncle Crazy sends them a link to something, that something MUST be factual. So they, in turn, share it. Facebook exacerbates a problem, but it is not the problem.
Before Facebook, those same characters forwarded emails to tell you that if you licked an envelope cockroach eggs will grow in your stomach. Yes, it was a thing. The solution when was not to block Americans' access to email.
That said, Facebook needs to take some responsibility for the content which generates its profits. We just have to find a way to claw back all advertising revenue from sites/accounts that turn out to be manufacturers of deliberate lies. That will make Facebook and (twitter) pay attention.
2
I got news from the following areas that are more than enough. NY Times, Guardian, Al Jazeera, Bloomberg, CNN, ABC news, PBS, CCTV (China), Phoenix (HK), TVBS & CTI (both Taiwan), CBC (Canadian Public Broadcast, highly recommend), AP & Reuters, and Houston Chronicle. What else do I need?
4
Notable is that all these Facebook pages, linked web sites, and Facebook itself are driven by a profit motive through ad revenue.
The pages and websites spreading political disinformation do want to misguide the electorate, true enough, but more, they want their money, from ad revenue.
This money, the way the American election system is set up, can flow to PACS and super PACS, to help someone, or some party, get elected.
PACS are required to report campaign contributions to the FEC, but super PACS are organized as 501(c)(4) organizations under the tax code, that is, non-profits. Tax law allows these groups to collect unlimited amounts of money from donors without having to report the contributions.
It's impossible to follow super PAC money. Until the U.S. decides to pay for elections and forbid campaign contributions, this type of social media and web disinformation will continue.
It will only stop when the financial incentives of earning ad revenue, and donating to campaigns, are removed.
Americans hate to part with their money, whether earned shadily or legally.
So, it's up to the electorate to educate themselves on issues and candidates as best they can. Flag as spam suspect Facebook pages and websites.
The U.S. is so partisan right now, I'm unsure the electorate wants truth, just validation of their views. For those who care, do your best to find the truth.
And never click on on-line ads.
8
I wonder what the NYT might propose, government intervention? One could insist that the NYT does many similar things by choosing what to cover, what to "investigate" and how to spin the news with deceptive headlines. But they are looking out for us, unlike others? Fine to tell people what is happening, educate them to actually think, not fine to just insist that you know best.
4
The NYT would prefer LESS government intervention as the current White House continues to collude with Russia in its divisive disinformation campaign.
1
The censorship is accelerating and this article encourages it.
Alex Jones was awful, but no one should have censored him. As an attorney who has done a little free speech work, my understanding of the 1st Amendment is that it is to protect the worst speech (that is when it is really needed) from the federal and state governments, not just protect the popular or establishment line of baloney. But when media corporations are in a partnership with the government, the 1st Amendment applies to them as well as agents of the government.
Limiting free speech is always hazardous to a real democracy because it gives our governments (who are rarely ever to be fully trusted) too much power over choosing what we may hear and express. That is why both those on the real left and on the right who are knowledgeable oppose censorship in any form.
3
@Timshel
I don't think Alex Jones is a good hill for free speech advocates to die on. The Pizzagate fiasco and the harassment of the Sandy Hook Families seem like reason enough for companies to distance themselves form him. Additionally, this doesn't prevent people from finding him, it only prevents him from spreading his 'reporting' on particular platforms. Saying those platforms shouldn't' be able to restrict him creates a slippery slope in the other way, i.e. since he has a press pass, he should be allowed onto the NYT op-ed page, it's a platform for disseminating news and opinion to credentialed individuals that allows op-eds on a regular basis. Basically, I don't feel that speech is being restricted as long as your only a google search away. If google/bing/duckduck/etc. start blocking his search results and dns providers delisting his sites, then whether or not censorship is government driven seems relevant.
Not to worry, folks, you can now have "the real news" sent directly to you from the office of the POTUS.
"Step right up! Step right up!"
2
Wouldn't Koch, Mercer, foreign governments, US corporations-- wouldn't they all hire hacker outside the US? What if big corporation America hired outside countries and hackers, and now, they are "made inAmerica' hackers?
If you don't know the source do not open those pages. It is that easy. You your own self is the blame passing the buck will not change that.
So many people live in 2 worlds: the real world where their actual lives take place and their fantasy world where their pretended lives take place.
The real world is full of boring, humdrum things like work, paying bills, taking care of your family, making decisions that may or may not work out right; get up, go to work, come home, watch trash TV, go to bed - yuck.
Go on Facebook; it's about me; I'm somebody in Facebook world. If only it was real; but it could be, couldn't it?
The stories, "news" could be real, couldn't they?
They spend so much of their time in their fantasy world - the world that could be - the world they want to be real - that they start losing their perspective on what is real and what is not.
False stories disguised as news fit right in.
It is not only the infectious disinformation which is bringing down our political system, but the vehemence with which it is repeated.
Example: After a recent debate between our candidates for U.S. Senate, I naively engaged a supporter of my candidate's opponent (I was wearing a candidate pin, so it was clear whose side I was on), thinking that I had a chance to gain insight into the other side's thinking.
My candidate had been criticized by the other candidate for not meeting with Kavanaugh, so I mentioned the Merrick Garland debacle as an example of hypocrisy. In response, I was told unequivocally and with great conviction that "a law prohibits Supreme Court nominations within a year of a presidential election."
In a calm voice, I told the supporter there is no such law, and that I am a lawyer. This seemed only to inflame her. She pivoted to a different topic and became furious, jabbing her finger in my face for emphasis. I was astounded and dismayed. My repeated requests for her to "calm down" and "take it down a notch" seemed to make things worse.
After a bystander intervened, she was led out of the auditorium.
Disinformation flourishes when no one talks to, or listens to, those with different information and opinions.
6
@Elizabeth Typical lawyerism. Sure, "there is no such Law," but Elizabeth must know that the notion was emphatically introduced and endorsed by Democrats, Biden among them, of not seating a SCOTUS justice in an election year.
2
@Elizabeth I agree that civil discourse is declining, but just who is calling openly for it to be eliminated until they get their way? It goes both ways and of course don't talk to those you don't really know and back off when you see attitudes like this. Indivisible is a great example of the left doing the same thing. Now it is not just that they don't listen, but they can't or won't think rationally for whatever reason.
2
@boroka setting aside the "Biden rule," there is still no law.
Repeat: No law.
Now if you want to go back and parse every statement by a GOP congressperson about deficits and debt and compare them to their actual enacted policy, please proceed.
I would imagine that the CIA and the NSA plus maybe the FBI have been engaged in these activities for years.
As far as these mavericks go, have fun. They might actually turn up something interesting.
1
How long is the NYTs going to put out this absurd baloney about the Russian gov't and Facebook. The story has been shown to be massively inaccurate.
3
Hmm? No examples of left wing manipulation?
I’m sure there are some but?...without examples it appears more of a false equivalency than a statement of fact.
Beware the equivalencies trap.
Fair and balanced? Are both sides are equally to blame? Blame carries the stigma of shunning and should not be widely broadcast untruthfully.
4
@RjW Actually this newspaper is a good example of left wing manipulation. I saw headlines on the front page that were inflamatory and inaccurate. Like the first lady takes the president's phone, that was a lie, she suggested he tweet less, big difference.
1
@RjW the print edition had a bold subhead on the front page, "Left and Right." Yet somehow all they could come up with from the left was a couple of logos? Absolutely false equivalency, and it's infuriating.
I can imagine the 8-page special on Trump's tax fraud last week with a subhead "Trump and Clinton cheat on taxes," and a sentence at the end about Clinton not recording accurate mileage for use of a personal vehicle one time.
5
@RjW
"Now, weeks before the midterm elections on Nov. 6, such influence campaigns are increasing"
This is the key strategy of groups like Right Wing News who exploit the loose campaign finance laws to smear their opponents. The goal is to keep people in power who work for them, not for the public. Voters have no idea who funds these ads, nor their hidden agendas.
Dark money is a scourge on democracy. If there was the political will Congress would ban all donations to candidates & we'd have open, accountable publicly funded elections.
Furthermore, the "left", i.e., people who want government to work for all and not only for a few billionaires have nothing like the right's money & infrastructure. ALEC, The State Policy Network (SPN), Americans for Prosperity, NRA, Breitbart, The DeVos Foundation, Koch Network are awash in dark money and that money is funneled overwhelmingly to Republicans.
With armies of corporate lawyers, multinational corporations have abused the tax code to influence elections & have manipulated congress to keep dark money donors secret.
The only remedy to end this tsuami of bribes & influence peddling is to ban donations to candidates.
1
From the onset, none of this was taken as seriously as it should be. I mean...step back for a minute. Can we even imagine if another president had learned that the election process had been compromised in the evident and myriad ways the last one was and that person did nothing to address the problem? Nothing. There would be howls for his head.
I had often heard the phrase "normalizing X" before this debacle when the concept was a safe abstraction. Now I know exactly what it means. Every day I wake up in a country that seems to think it's just fine that the "president" has been caught lying 5,000+ times, that he flagrantly breaks the Emoluments Clause, that he was found guilty of 5 crimes before running, that he ruined 5 businesses, that he lied about his finances (which is precisely why he refuses to turn over tax returns), and that not a day has passed when he has not mocked some American citizen, by name.
Early on there was an instructive night when a union leader was being critical of DT. While the show was still airing, DT responded by setting his goons on him; the man held up his phone and showed the death threats rolling in in live time. Within the hour, DT had tweeted threats and insults. My husband said,"Never seen anything like it; never heard a president attack someone by name; we're in a world of trouble, aren't we?"
We are because we tolerate this garbage. It's not normal. It's destroying us. We must stop living in an accountability-free zone.
18
@AhBrightWings You are a great example of what this is about. Many of those things you insist are true are by objective standards not, they are opinions not lies. The emoluments clause is not by some's opinions being violated, and I bet if it went to the supremes they would so rule. You think that tax returns have details that they really don't. You are part of the problem.
@vulcanalex And how do you know what details they contain? Are you omniscient? They're hiding something or we'd have access to them. I think you'd bet check the mirror if you want to see "part of the problem."
@AhBrightWings
It reminds me of 1933 Germany. Hitler used same tactics and ultimately won sole ruler in 1938. No German wanted to believe he would kill so many innocent people. Never say never. We are heading toward a dark time. I know I was born in Germany just after the war. But I know my history do these people who belong to this conservative paper know what they are heading toward?? Hatred begets hatred.
1
So when will the Ministry for Truth start to operate?
It is stupid to send out fake news but it is even more stupid to establish a censorship central to "prevent" people from getting fake news.
Such a Ministry for Truth is a very powerful tool in the hands of those that are no spreading fake news.
Just imagine what would happen if Alex Jones would become Secretary for Truth?
The best you can do is to make it very visible who is telling fake news stories and let the public decide if they take these news or not.
3
I deleted from my FB account any reference to politics and "took a break" from people who constantly post political content. Try it. You will be amazed how much better you feel leaving the junior high lunchroom and how much these social media sites are fueling our negative social discourse.
6
DELETE Facebook and Twitter. It is the only way our democracy will survive.
7
Add the “I” to FB. Facebook should pay the FBI to get involved. FB will never have the needed expertise or incentives to get the job done.
Many people prefer fake news and consider the truth to be an elitist “ point of view”. Many bad actors sense opportunities.
It’s a hard row to hoe but if we let the weeds take over we’ll end up needing to turn over the whole field and start over. Translation: shut down Facebook.
1
American right wingers adopted Soviet style disinformation warfare a long time ago. By now, it seems to be the only thing they know how to do.
5
I am ashamed of my fellow Americans who use lies to manipulate people with good intentions.
The Scout Oath:
On my honor, I will do my best
To do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law;
To help other people at all times;
To keep myself physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight.
The Scout Law:
A Scout is:
Trustworthy,
Loyal,
Helpful,
Friendly,
Courteous,
Kind,
Obedient,
Cheerful,
Thrifty,
Brave,
Clean,
and Reverent.
2
What about FOX the leader in right-wing disinformation for over 25 years? These online and secondary sources only propagate and amplify the Rupert Murdoch propaganda machine. And all you have to do is look at the wealth and power he has accumulated during his reign to see why he went to the far right for his media empire.
6
Twas ever thus. Today we have more "creators" and their reach is greater than ever before. The press has abrogated their responsibility to be a neutral arbiter, and this is one of the results. GOOGLE and Facebook have proven they can't do it either. Reader beware was always a good rule to live by; personal responsibility for vetting your sources is more important than ever.
3
There is a place online that you can use to check out stories. Of course, not everything is there & it is hard for them to keep up with all the postings. I did check this story & here is there assessment. Of course, there is much more info. on this site.
The site is : QUESTIONABLE SOURCES.
Bias: Extreme Right, Propaganda
@graceD. And you just "trust" them? Not me!!
Those who blindly believe everything they see on the Internet that reinforces their fears and pre-conceived notions will get what they deserve- even more disinformation and rumor mongers as leaders.
1
Too bad the model cannot be as elementary as a) have good ideas, b) ask people to vote for you because your ideas are good and mainstream. Why has disinformation become more the political "in" thing than debate over what should be a clash of ideas?
Candidates will always lie about each other and to the voters, but it is harder to find out the truth when the press and the readers have to ferret out disinformation on top of lies. A half-truth, it is said, is worse than a lie, because there is some level of truth along with a lie. Disinformation seems to be the art of being able to use the social media to peddle all lies but make them sound substantiated...sort like what Trump tries to do.
1
Facebook is doomed. It might take twenty years but its structure is undefendable from manipulation. Bad actors will always find ways to get around controls and will always be a day late in their implementation.
It reminds me of political advertising writ large.
Unedited news and political opinion may be something we just can’t handle.
To the editors: Thank you for your service.
1
Education, real education, might make much disinformation irrelevant and properly ignored. A large part of real education is to teach our young to always, and I mean always, question the "answers" they are fed. Not just in the classrooms, but in the other, much more powerful spheres of informing the public and shaping their thinking. To assert, for example, that we need to dream more is at the center of this decade-long disinformation campaign. Dreaming can lead the average Merkan to believe and propagate some weird notions: such as, for example, that all immigrants are a drain on the economy, or that all cops are out to shoot people, or that manufactured diversity is an absolute plus for communities. The list of eminently false and destructive dreams is endless. The result is that voters cast their ballots for the latest shiny object whose name is glorified 24-7. Yes, we produce and spread our own mental poison, and we teach our young how to do it ever more efficiently.
1
This shows why we need a cognitive immune system for social media -- demoting the promotion junk from our feeds is not censorship. (Don't censor the borderline cases, just don't spread them as widely.) Crowdsourcing promises to be the ultimate way to identify and interdict fake news. Our platforms should exploit the information on quality already available from all of us. More on how at http://bit.ly/CogImmS.
1
The article is a bit short on memory.
It is well known that right wing people on general are a bit more anxious and vulnerable for fear mongering articles and there is a long history of media and politicians trying to exploit that. Fox News and Breitbart are good examples. And the Macedonians with their pro-Trump sites before the elections demonstrated that there was money to made with such disinformation even if you were a poor lonely outsider.
In a sense the article itself is an example of disinformation on the internet. It once again comes with its Russiagate allegations that don't hold on closer inspection.
When you look at the Russian sponsored Facebook sites they seldom contain real disinformation. They collect stories from US sources and add a bit of inciting text themselves. Occasionally such a story is false but those are exceptions and in in many cases the site managers probably believe them to be true.
Those Russians seldom invent a story. How could they? These are usually underpaid people who never have been to the US. If they try to make up a story they are bound to have details wrong and their story is likely to look ridiculous. Much of Russiagate is about things that are true, like the Podesta emails.
5
Wim, You underestimate the Russians. They’re very good at this and many other nefarious activities. I don’t see what possible purpose it serves to defend them.
Examples of their creativity should be posted by Facebook itself and our media outlets in general. That we we would get a sense of just how manipulated we’ve been.
4
There are not a whole lot of ways to stop this.
Pretty much the only ones are to require transparency in registering domains - every one must have a published owner, rather than a proxy.
User flags and watchdog flags should be taken seriously, and sites tagged as propaganda should be labeled as propaganda.
But we are not going to get rid of liars, so we'd better educate ourselves. I'd personally start that education about 4th grade, and have kids do weekly assignments on commercials that show what the commercial is trying to get you to do and why. As they get to high school they can work on identifying bias and falsehoods in published media.
But mostly? We are a nation that glories in the lowest common denominator, but like Lake Wobegon, our kids are all above average.
2
@Cathy So you actually trust educators to be fair? How about parents point out these things?
This is all extremely scary, but it's usually pretty obvious to an educated reader which sites are real and which promote bogus information. (Hint: a lot took layout lessons from The National Enquirer.) Both political extremes have their practitioners, true, but the ones on the right are far more numerous, thus far more egregious. An educated reader can tell what's what, but the US has a huge number of uneducated ones, led by the apparently semi-literate liar-in-chief; sadly, they have been granted a disproportionate position in the forum of ideas.
In my view, Facebook is both a problem and a symptom. So is Twitter. Trying to police them will help, but that alone won't solve the issue. A genuine facts-based education will. That education must include the full spectrum of history, how to live within "the social contract," and how to identify and combat propaganda in all its virulent forms. WWII was started and promoted with propaganda as a major weapon to destroy the social contract; looks like WWIII may be, too. As the sadly true cliche says, those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it.
3
The real issue goes far beyond what the Russians, Chinese, political extremists, or any other group do on social media and is a it is rooted in the inability of much of the American public to exercise their faculties of reason and judgement. I do not understand why anyone relies on a social media site as their primary source of news. The juxtaposition of stories about serious matters next to stupid cat pictures should supply a clue that there are more credible news outlets. I believe it is laziness that leads many of the electorate to rely on social media for political news. Combined with the fact social media tends amplify confirmation bias in individuals, as long as people accept social media as a relevant and reliable news source, the problem will not go away.
9
"Judicial Crisis Network,"* run by a [former?] clerk of Thomas, has been pumping a lot of money into getting Kavanaugh passed the goal line.
* this is a misnomer, of course, like its older brother "Judicial Watch," which is an activist arm of the conservative patrons, it is used to impose its reactionary agendas on America with disinformation and harassment campaigns
7
More examples of the distortions of the first amendment to pursue political advantage! Except in a court of law where perjury requires truthfulness under pain of consequences, am I to believe that people can lie "ad nauseam" without defining their statements as opinion?
3
Would it be indelicate to point out that the various hate campaigns back to at least 2008 are well documented? Check out the stories on political trolls of all kinds, signed up in warehouses where the people and the offices then disappear. That was about 8 years ago, long before "Russians" were even mentioned. We had a few different species going through the forums on our site, they all knew each other, spreading their bliss across multiple other sites. They did exactly the same things on every site. They were even scripted.
Point being - This was happening in plain site, admitted in public, and nobody did a damn thing, all those years ago. Since them the pattern bullying, disinformation etc. have blossomed in plain view, and now, years later, it's an issue? These people are making a living out of spreading hate and disinformation. They're paid to do it. Aren't financial incentives to defraud websites by falsely creating accounts some form of crime? Quite apart from actual statutory crimes like threats, intimidation, harassment,defamation, and the rest of the encyclopedia?
There's plenty you can do about it. The question is whether anyone will lift a finger.
3
Can't Blasey Ford's lawyers sue Right Wing News for libel? If not, why not?
6
Divisive messages are in mainstream media as well.
1
Basically, what this is telling us is no different than what us "old fogies" have been telling our kids and grandkids all along: "If you're getting your 'news' off Facebook and the Internet, then you aren't getting 'the news' at all."
12
Again, they're censoring content from real people, which violates 1st Amendment rights. If they shut down phony accounts, then that is a reasonable limitation. These sites have never permitted unlimited multiple accounts. However, if 50 people join together in a plan to promote a particular news site or article, then that's legitimate grass-roots politics. If you are offended by the lack of truthiness in an article, then you need mobilization and counter-promotion to balance the debate. Billionaires on all sides stand ready to help.
There is a glaring flaw in the Russian-meddling conspiracy theory. Our politicians leave nothing on the table. Most congressmen have nightmares of losing by a dozen votes, so any pressure group with a dozen people can get their attention. There are literally zero wedge issues or sleeper issues that our politicians should not already be exploiting.
Our system of government pushes division to the forefront. It keeps us stable in our strife, because no ill-intended outsiders can find a foothold. Totalitarian and repressive regimes fear outside meddling. That being true, if Russians did meddle effectively, America owes them a great debt of gratitude. To the extent that meddling succeeds, it means some unseen anti-democratic dynamics are forcing American politicians to ignore voter concerns.
1
@Real D B Cooper
This voter is concerned about voter suppression and intimidation, and other forms of cheating, which are coming in tidal waves from Republicans in power, and are closing out poorer voters and others across the land, particularly in red states and districts.
It doesn't matter what "the people" want if the minority controls all branches of government and is busy doing everything in their power - up to and including trigger happy policemen, private prisons, and the school to prison pipeline for uppity kids - to continue to rule as a one party government.
12
@Real D B Cooper Somehow you forget that the first amendment only applies to government, not to corporations or individuals. If I own Facebook, I can insist on whatever rules I want. And politicians have always ignored voter concerns, they just want to get elected to keep power. That is why this president is different, he is keeping his promises, unlike others.
@Susan Anderson The amount of what you are concerned with is very small compared to the population, not zero but not worth the effort over say real issues like illegal immigration, bad infrastructure, waste in the federal government, etc.
Fact: “Russian interference in 2016 was a deliberate distraction by HRC and the democrats to hide their failure. Just read the Joint Intelligence Report – it contains little factual information, indeed less than was presented on Iraq.
It did factually state that a Russian Television programme had a programme on Occupy Wall Street that was critical of the USA, but so what. I recall a BBC programme on the Occupy movement that was reasonably well discussed AND BBC is a state supported TV station.
It really is ludicrous when American Media uses its own creation to attribute wrong doing by Russia.
2
@Robert Jennings
Saying it's a fact doesn't make it so. That's your opinion, and you're sticking to it. There is a vast and increasing amount of information that says this is the opposite of fact.
11
The story goes on and on, and it is horrifying to discover that Trump has tapped into millions of punters who believe him, no matter how often or how accurately his sources or shown to be lies. In addition, nobody seems to care about the firehose coming from abroad:
https://www.wired.com/story/information-terrorists-trying-to-reshape-ame...
"Cassandra Fairbanks ... [2013] Occupy movement/anti-rape activist. ...[2015] Ferguson with Black Lives Matters. Her anti-police anarchist attitudes gained her the attention of Russian propaganda outlet Sputnik ... At the time, she was a fan of Bernie Sanders and engaged with his campaign. ... threw in with Trump, using her platform to convince other Bernie supporters to come with her. ... tapping into the leftist anti-establishment sentiment backing Sanders was a pillar of the 2016 Kremlin disinformation campaigns"
"helped the teenage girl sexting with disgraced former congressman Anthony Weiner ... sell her story to the media. The girl would later explain she had baited Weiner into the online relationship to see what he would do. ... Johnson's efforts (... amplified by his "troll army") became the pretext for the FBI's access to Weiner's computer"
Surprise surprise! Kavanaugh:
"Once information architecture is in place, it's like pipes. You just inject new material into the system, and it gets where it needs to go faster and faster as people get used to receiving narratives and themes in a certain context from certain sources."
3
“The shift toward domestic disinformation raises potential free speech issues when Facebook and Twitter find and curtail such accounts that originate in the United States...”
There are NO free-speech issues here. First Amendment guarantees of free speech apply ONLY to the suppression or regulation of speech by GOVERNMENT; what passes between private entities, whether they are individuals, corporations or social media platforms is not covered by the Amendment. Facebook, Twitter et al can censor whatever, and ban whomever they choose; their reluctance to do so stems not from any fear of legal liability, but from alienating and outraging a large swath of their users on the basis of perceived political bias, which would, of course, depress their advertising revenues.
Because of services for which they’ve contracted and paid, those advertisers are owed certain promised performance on the part of the media platforms, but they, too, have no First Amendment guarantees. Away from governmenr involvement, “free speech” is not a legal concept, but merely a state of mind.
11
In the eyes of Facebook employees this is all going to plan.
The social feed is the new printing press; trying to stop its inexorable spread is akin to trying to stop Gutenberg and his ilk from printing books.
Yes, sometimes bad things will happen -- for example Henry Ford once distributed a series of deeply antisemitic pamphlets unappetizingly called "The International Jew". But you can't stop people from spreading speech, is the view of the New New Media. And if consumers want to consume it, you shouldn't censor it; not for any moral reason per se but just because in the long run it won't work, they believe.
The tone does seem to have gotten more grim lately as the fringe becomes the mainstream, as Art Bell gives way to Alex Jones and Alex Jones's buddies get invited to White House press briefings (or get JOBS there).
Where does this all lead -- where is this laboratory of Internet-empowered viral hatred and lies leading us? Who can say? And … who can possibly stop it?
Kudos to the NYT for at least chronicling these events. Hopefully some future archivist can piece this all together.
12
@Michael No one needs to censor anything, except as defined by law as unlawful speech (there is such a thing). Companies like Facebook have more than enough resources to fact check the widest spreading items and report the results. If one still chooses not to believe that reportage, fine, but the purveyors of the medium would have done their duty as citizens of the world, if not from any legal requirement.
Sad that so many people don't bother to fact check on their own, given the availability of so much information for doing so right at one's fingertips. However, people are literally dying because of garbage spread through social media; dangerous opinion is bad enough, but fake news and misrepresentation should be anathema. Essentially, lies should not be allowed to stand. That way lies chaos.
With excellent hard news national outlets such as the NY Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, PBS News Hour and some great regional ones that all offer world class in depth coverage of local, national, and world news, I really have a hard time understanding the attraction of all of these biased click bait sites. Do people go there due to intellectual laziness, time constraints or are they more comfortable in an echo chamber where everyone has views identical to theirs? It doesn't take a lot of time to check out both sides of an issue from news outlets adhering to journalistic standards that may have different opinions on coverage of the same story, so I have to conclude that some segments of the population just want their news presented like WWE Wrestling.
6
@Kevin Excellent??? More like highly biased.
1
Why are these headlines not changed to reflect THE TRUTH - "RIGHT WING REPUBLICANS CREATING FAKE FACEBOOK ADS TO TRICK VOTERS" - I know some left-wing sites were cited as well, but 2/3 WERE REPUBLICANS and ALL Russian efforts went to PROP UP REPUBLICANS. This is the real story - why is the Times sugar-coating it???
33
Facebook shouldn't compromise in such a way.
Both sites should be allowed to continue.
Develop a series of symbols to assign to questionable material perhaps..
I'd rather enjoy seeing what Russian trolls have say.
who is next ?? the Flat Earth folks.
1
The strategy is "Made in Russia," who've taught the right wing what they know about propaganda and disinformation.
Even ideas are not "made in America" anymore, although of course the corrupt implementation of them by the likes of Trump and his right-wing gang are. The ethics of Trump and the (party formerly known as ) Republicans are on a par with those of Putin and Duarte, which is to say in the lowest depths of the sewer.
4
Really worried that thin skinned and power hungry politicians of both political parties are targeting social media and Facebook in particular as a way to "police" or erode free speech. Conservative talk show hosts have been spewing falsehoods for decades...and yet no curb on them..Why? Because radio..or print magazines are paid media. Free social media is at a crossroads...the purely democratic nature of it threatens the tryant in us. The answer is not censorship it is education. The greatest bukwark of democracy is an educated electorate. Let our politicians pay for that!!
4
Egads, are there still people clicking on "news" they find on Facebook?
8
Caveat emptor.
Don't click.
Delete account.
Educate yourself.
15
Antisocial media, once just a festering sore, is now a gangrenous limb whose infection will eventually kill the American body politic, as well as that of every free Western nation, if we don't take drastic measures now.
4
This is why the Russian disinformation campaign, although disturbing, never bothered me much in 2016. We already had the Koch bros spreading fake news and spending way more money on disinformation.
12
I deactivated my Facebook account about a month ago. I miss seeing family posts but I could no longer deal with the sadness and despair I felt seeing some friends and family reposting ludicrous articles and then getting into heated and nasty exchanges with others over politics. This country is so divided I really wonder if it can heal during my lifetime.
I deactivated Twitter as well. It’s all just too much. Being hyper-ticked off much of the time isn’t good for anyone’s mental or physical health.
44
Same, and I haven't missed it. I can still text pictures to family or friends and ask them to send pictures back in return. I still have a phone number. Communication was possible before social media and still is. The world will go on without it.
2
This suggests Americans did not know how to abuse Facebook until the Russians showed us how.
I think we could and did figure it out quite well all on our own.
8
In order to understand what is really happening here we need to jump three chess moves ahead. The goal of Russian interference is multifaceted. They don’t want to just sow chaos and make Americans scream in cyberspace at one another, they don’t just ant to make a mockery of our institutions, and infiltrate our elections. They want to target everything our country stands for, what better way than to start attacking the U.S. Constitution? Suppose we move to suppressing FB altogether? They have single handedly destroyed instant communication networks not just across our country, but across the world.
1
Welcome to Gutenberg's printing press: A wonderful thing--free speech, left, right, and fantasy. Facebook policing the streets of free speech--impossible.
7
Long before the internet or Facebook, up here in rural Far North Queensland amongst farming families in particular, the biggest and most destructive conspiracy theory I still come across regularly, one that goes back at least two thousand years, is that behind every bad thing that happens to us is a hidden international cabal of all powerful Jews that controls governments, the banks and the media.
Two very charming acquaintances whom eventually I got to know well were utterly convinced of this view. They had grown up beIieving it. All their family members including theur cousins, aunts and uncles believed it. Worst of all, it had been drummed into them by the Irish Australian Sisters at their Roman Catholic primary schools and by the Irish Australian Brothers at their Roman Catholic secondary boarding schools. Nothing I said could dent their certainty. Both were high functioning alcoholics.
Many journalists in the Australian Broadcasting Corporation are deeply anti-Semitic. They cloak their antipathy behind a fake concern for the rights of Palestinians, and the rights of Sunnis and Shiites. Surprise, surprise, they all turn out to be Roman Catholics of Irish or Sicilian heritage, who went to Roman Catholic schools.
21
@Colenso
There are more blacks found in the NBA than found in normal distribution of population, right? Why?
1
@Colenso
Unbelievable. What appears at first to be an expose of a ghastly millenarian conspiracy theory in remote Queensland, is, in actual fact, a front to promulgate another one! I would like to point out to American readers that there has been for well over a decade here a relentless political campaign against the Australian Broadcasting Corporation led by right wing politicians and media groups who are jealous of its share of the Australian media landscape. Colenso has no evidence whatsoever to back up his claim that the ABC is a hotbed of anti-semites. Just so you know.
4
Who is providing the start up funding? Hedge funds? VCs?
3
It is a fine line between opinion and disinformation. I read news from a number of perspectives and so have been targeted by both sides. I have to say that there is no equivalent between the two sides in outlandish claims—the right wing is far more likely to distort the truth or repeat erroneous rumors. Much of the purported ‘left wing’ posts were in fact promulgated by trolls to incite the right wing. Your article implies that both sides are equally guilty but you fail to cite even one example of ‘left wing’ false claims. This kind of conclusion encourages a ‘blame both sides’ attitude which is factually wrong.
176
"It is a fine line between opinion and disinformation."
Maybe, sometimes, but lies are lies, and propaganda and disinformation are propaganda and disinformation, NOT a matter of opinion.
4
The article is factually wrong? Based on what facts? You state none.
Very clever use of misinformation. Thanks for providing a clever example! lol
1
Hear hear!
2
Where is this taking us? Read Cormac McCarthy's "The Road"
6
@SH - also read Dave Eggers' "The Circle" - how good people go bad.
The real crazies are claiming that since Chuck Schumer has a niece who is an actress, Dr. Ford did not actually testify at the Senate Hearing about Kavanaugh, but rather it was actress Amy Schumer. That is not true. However, it is theoretically possible, in that it does not violate any laws of physics nor require time travel. No laws of science would be violated if Hollywood make-up experts were able to make Amy Schumer look like Dr. Ford.
What is not possible is that Dr. Ford misidentified Kavenaugh, Judge, Gaudette and J.C. as the people she was with on July 1, 1982 at Timmy Gaudette’s house in Rockville, MD. Once Ford’s account included three other people she said were there and his calendar also had them all at Tim’s house on July 1, 1982, the only way that Kavanaugh is not lying is either: Ford somehow previously obtained access to his 1982 diary/calendar, or Ford has a time machine or Ford stalked Kavanaugh in 1982 and planned to do this, if and when he was nominated to the Supreme Court.
30
@Lance Brofman
Sir, I know Amy Schumer. Dr. Ford is no Amy Schumer.
6
@Albert Ross And vice-versa.
1
@Lance Brofman How interesting, none of those who she said were there remember it at all. Ford to me is totally unbelievable about almost anything. She apparently did not know how to swear her testimony, that alone makes me question everything. And I am never 100% sure of my memories, even ones from say yesterday, claiming that means you really don't understand or are spinning.
Facebook is toxic. Do yourself and everyone else a favor and delete (or at least deactivate) your account. If and when they get their stuff together, by all means join again. It’s an abusive relationship. They mine and sell your data with few scruples, and you just shrug and say “maybe but he’s a good man”. No, no he isn’t.
18
GIGO. Stick w mainstream news outlets.
5
Follow the money, NYT : who pays these groups ?
The US government uses very bad people
"Limo Company Owner in Crash Revealed as F.B.I. Informant, Recruiter of Terrorists, Fraudster"
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/09/nyregion/limo-owner-fbi-informant-sha...
20 dead people
Facebook is being disingenuous; it is doing nothing to remove trolls and bots from its pages. There is one political page that I report on a daily basis (it's obviously fake as a bot comments and replies with the same script over and over again). Facebook does not allow one to report a political page as fake. Even when I've reported comments as spam, promoting violence, or hate speech, or I've reported a fake profile, I always receive the same response from Facebook: it doesn't violate Facebook's community standards (which must be really low!)
16
I'm glad Facebook, Twitter and other social media platforms are taking necessary steps to identify and curtail the spread of fake news. I hope they could also extend the same effort in other parts of the world where fake news is just as prevalent. It's damaging to society and it does not promote or exemplify free speech.
3
This is a conspiracy news media hit on conservative users. They have to censor conservative users before the mid-terms so that we only get one side of the dialogue. If you condone this type of censorship then we are in big trouble, as it will also work it's way to the left also.
1
@allen blaine The most disappointing aspect was that reporters on television interviewing Republicans who said they believed that something happened to Dr. Ford, not asking if the Republicans could come up with any possible scenario where Dr. Ford correctly identified the date and place as well as the four males there, before it was known that Kavanaugh’s diary/calendar unambiguously puts Kavanaugh and three people Ford identified as being there in the same house on July 1, 1982. Ford’s description of the interior of Gaudette’s house in Rockville, MD exactly matches that of the actual house, which still exists.
Ford's knowledge of who was there and Kavanough's denial that he was there, would be enough to convict Kavanaugh in any criminal court if he denied being there at the time. Any trained law enforcement officer knows this, as does anyone who has seen a police program on TV.
In any normal case where BOTH the victim and the defendant’s calendar unambiguously put defendant and three people the victim identified as being there, the defendant would not dispute that he was there, but rather he would argue it was consensual. That train has left already for Kavanaugh.
There are some interesting aspects of this case regarding how victims of sexual assault are treated and reproductive rights. However, unfortunately every word said or printed about those aspects draws attention away from the fact that the 1982 diary/calendar proves that Ford has identified the correct people.
25
@Lance Brofman You have twisted what Ford said, She said she did not know where the house was, how she got there, how she got home and who might have driven her home because she was 15, how many people were in the room, she told her therapist that there were 4 people in the room but did not name anyone, and now she says there were 2 people in the room, her only witness she named in the room was Judge and he, under oath, said he did not know of the event she was talking about and Kavanaugh did not do this, then the other 3 "witnesses" denied under oath that the event never happened and that they don't even recall the party Ford was relating to. In a court of law an accused person is innocent until PROVEN guilty, and ford's case would have been dismissed outright for lack of evidence. Even Ford's "best friend" denied the event ever happened. This was a hit piece on Kavanaugh to try and derail his nomination. There is an investigation going on right now into Fienstien's roll in this farce. Fienstien and the DNC cooked up this whole thing. Their heads will roll.
We need to put their CEO in jail because its happening all over again. More culture of corruption Republicans will be elected and finally destroy our great country with continued coal and fossil fuel use. Very sad the GOP congress did not put him in jail after the hearing. He is a traitor.
2
It's always nice to quash speech you don't believe. Is Facebook going to go after misleading stories on ghosts, UFO's, the moon landing, lets throw god in there too, just for fun, and all other misleading conspiracy stories?....Unlikely.
The line of what is misleading is drawn by your perception and perspectives.
I say, let it roll. Let everything be posted by anyone, as long as it's not a crime. And if it really is a crime, charges should be pressed or it should go back up.
People that want to believe the National Enquirer, Globe, interest groups, Russians, Chinese, Louis Farrahkan, the pope, etc.
Are the type that will always be duped by some nonsense from someone.....This is not a new phenomenon snowflake youngsters.
When conspiracies were spread by rumour it was worse understanding what's going on!
Pre-Facebook 1980 USSR. I was there, the government controlled speech. Almost every Russian knew that Brezhnev and Carter were jews! For 2 days it was all over that Elton John killed. I saw it on a news board at Red Square. It was of course, John Lennon.
When the government starts limiting speech on individuals or those that publish individual views, it's a slippery slope....Regulation breeds more regulations.
I'm suprised most NYT liberals that commented, favor govt restrictions on speech.
But, as a liberal in the libertarian fashion, Facebook can choose to restrict speech in whatever way they see fit. It's there platform.
4
@Lindsey Reese We need laws limiting political misinformation campaigns. Some legal burden of proof before a profiteering organization can release an article. As of now, Congress has lambasted Facebook both for not regulating its content and suppressing hypothetical conservative voices. We can't let the discourse degrade because the current party in power (GOP) benefits from it. There are too many outlandish claims being made every day to recognize and address them all, and misinformation is no longer on the fringe. Putin took down one of the foremost democracies in the world through misinformation.
8
Were they? I don't remember that being in the Soviet media.
I disagree. Who determines what is misinformation? The party in power? Very dangerous idea.
I don't think you'd like Trumps appointees to the " Federal Misinformation Commission"!
While this article perpetuates the “both sides” myth, no where does it provide evidence of false stories being spread on the left.
93
Although the article names left-leaning accounts that appear to have run afoul of Facebook, it gives no examples of these sites actively or knowingly spreading misinformation. If there are specific cases in which this happened, I would like to hear about them. If not, why lump these with Right Wing News?
48
It's really pretty easy. Make a statement, then back it up with evidence. The right wing simply doesn't bother to deal with EVIDENCE.
6
All so simple, really: shut down Facebook. If not by government edict (undesirable) then by user revolt and abandonment. I closed my account 5 years ago and haven't missed a thing.
3
@Paxinmano
At least 10 days perhaps before and during the election.
This is really not surprising is it? We have a President who lies constantly or who indulges in ‘alternative facts’. Advertising has spread lies for years..remember the message from tobacco company execs that swore before a congressional comittee that nicotine was not addictive? Or WMD in Iraq? However, there doe seem to be severe ramping up of deliberate lying and manipulation.caveat emptor.
18
I have a hard time grappling with this because I don't think it's wrong for non-US actors, including governments, and the Russian government, to express themselves on Facebook. I don't think that freedom of speech should be limited to Americans, or to popular speech, and I think most people engage in some form of disinformation every day. If a democracy is to survive, its people have to take it seriously, and there is nothing serious about conspiracy theories or easily-Snoped, half-baked stories full of misspellings and bad grammar. I don't blame Russia for trying to influence an American campaign. I blame Americans for being too lazy to see through it and too stubborn to admit being suckered by it, and for reposting it to advance their own partisan agendas. I don't blame Facebook for the fact that some choose to use that wonderful tool to post, consume, and repost garbage. I blame the American citizenry and electorate for our current condition, for being so ungrateful and irresponsible with the blessings bestowed on them by others in the past who did not enjoy the same benefits. I don't blame Putin for being one of many foreign actors who would like to affect our elections. I blame Americans for cooperating with him to corrupt our system.
7
@Joe I agree with your post except for the fact that this is not a democracy, it is a republic. Big difference.
2
Not to quibble, but we are a "representative democracy". We are also a republic. They aren't mutually exclusive.
We are represented by States in the Senate and Electoral College and by people, in the house of representatives.
It's an amalgamation. It attempts to create a mix of multiplicity of interests and sects to stifle the majority from dominating the minority....Some people really like it!!
7
@allen blaine
OK then, tell us the difference. It wouldn't be that those words are related to "Democratic" and "Republican", would it? A not-so-subtle way of indicating that one is not as American as the other, perhaps?
When false news have for a long time been spread from the U.S. by both government and media for political purposes against other countries, Cuba, among many others, it was acceptable. But now it is "fake news" about U.S. politics. Unacceptable!
5
@Jorge Rolon What would be an example of 'fake news" spread by the US government or mainstream media about Cuba? An example more recent than 1897, please!
@Gary I can give you many,but since you want a recent one, here it is: "Cuba has a laboratory where they are manufacturing chemical weapons." John Bolton. If you want more examples, please let me know.
The enemy of modernity is this self validating reality.
2
This is fake news and fake popularity and fake everything else. What? Can't they win on the merits? If they were honest, wouldn't people like what they were saying? If they just described their policies (e.g., decimate Social Security and Medicare), wouldn't people fall all over themselves to vote for them?
Cheerful thought: "Facebook’s tactics are extremely ineffective in stopping these networks of hundreds of Facebook pages and accounts from spreading disinformation …" Facebook is a threat to our democracy. They need to be regulated and now.
7
The local stream in my city is a protected resource and although fishing is allowed, it is strictly catch and release. If you get caught trying to keep the fish it is a hundred dollar fine - per fish!
Publishing fake or misleading content should be punished with a fine that makes it not worth the trouble.
It is truly painful to watch my dear old dad spouting Fox talking points and people drift away from him. Rupert Murdoch should be fined - heavily.
48
@christopher
Well, it was during the asministration of St. Ronnie that the Fairness Doctrine was scattered with the wind.
8
@christopher
I have for a long time thought that fines were totally wrongly calculated. A poor person may need the fish just to keep alive. Others are just indulging themselves.
I feel that punishments should be equal in effect by being a proportion of income. A fine of say $10,000,000 on a billionaire might achieve the same effect as a $100 on the average person.
2
Oh, how I miss Walter Cronkite! If you don't know who that is, ask someone over 60.
16
@Jennene Colky, who needs Walter when we have the newly re-energized bunny, Brian Williams who talks now like he is the sole proprietor of gospel truth.
1
The headline suggesting that US groups are take a "page from the Russian playbook" kept me from reading the article. The US has used disinformation better than anyone for over 75 yrs.
2
When you sign up for Air B&B you have to take a picture of your driver's license and I think you also take a selfie so that they can match your face with the picture on the license. Let's do that for twitter and Facebook. No more anonymity!
6
Anonymity allows me, a federal employee, to criticize my elected officials without fear of losing my job/home/healthcare.
I truly wish I could freely exercise my Constitutional right to free speech, but that’s not reality.
12
The disinformation campaign and the Cambridge Analytica scandal were more than enough to get my to permanently delete my Facebook account and all other social media accounts I had.
I go to legitimate websites to read news like BBC, CBC, NYT, Time, etc.
If the social media giants don’t get this under control maybe it’s time to shut them down as they are undermining the democracy.
16
The good news is that Facebook is looking into this issue of spreading false information on its platform.
2
Like a Smorgasbord, I say put it all out there and let me pick for myself what I want to eat rather than someone telling me what I should eat. Save that for when I’m laying comatose in a hospital being tube fed, in which case I won’t care. It makes no sense to rail against social media at the same time we invest most of our lives into it. It’s like we have a death wish but can’t resist it. Just call me Lemming. I’d just assumed not discuss it while going over the cliff, let me just pretend to myself it’s the stairway to heaven.
1
Those congratulating themselves for not getting their news from Facebook should make sure that the traditional press they read upholds proper standards of fact-checking and correction. It might not have occurred in real time, but for the spreading of disinformation started by Americans, for Americans, yesterday's Trump op-ed in USA Today would be hard to beat.
9
This sort of thing is what "fake news" originally referred to, and logically meant, before Trump hijacked the term for his own purposes.
The Mueller enquiry may provide findings that cause trouble for Trump, but more important is the information it can provide for future use against techniques of interference in and corruption of the democratic process, whether of foreign or domestic origin, and wherever in the world they may be applied. This is the proper focus; any problems for Trump are mere spin-off.
Trump however, aided and abetted unfortunately by the impeachment-focused amongst his opposition, insists on seeing things the other way around - it is all about him.
Is there a way in which the US can take the focus off Trump and onto the health of its polity? The rest of us would also benefit, hugely, if that could be done.
6
Just like the Russians failed to influence a single American to vote a certain way these Americans spreading disinformation will fail to influence anyone to vote their suggestion about who to vote for. I had a Facebook friend who was trying to bully me into voting the candidate he wanted me to vote for in the 2016 presidential election and he did not succeed. I think for myself and I vote independently. I don't ask anyone else not even a family member to vote the way I would want them to vote.
From now until election day November 06, 2018, Americans are going to be bombarded with propaganda, opinion columnists, celebrities, news anchors, editorial endorsements, smear campaigns, arm twisting and a whole lot of disinformation but one can only hope that they think for themselves and vote for the candidate who will best represent their interest, for our country, world peace and vote not for the hatred of someone or a party but for the love of our country and keep our democracy strong.
2
It's a fact. Humans are basically uninformed and swayed by gossip. Go read Orwell's 'Animal Farm' if you want to see who we are.
12
So the President lies, and constantly spreads misinformation. Maybe the press should stop covering him.
34
People still use Facebook?
We’re doomed.
17
I guess this is a problem...if you rely on Facebook to shape your opinions?
4
"Made and Distributed in the U.S.A.: Online Disinformation"
Nop! You are all wrong! There is no online disinformation created and disseminated by anyone within USA or, for that matter, by Russians. It is all done by the Chinese. If interest to know the truth, and nothing but the truth, ask Mr. Trump.
1
We need to find out who these individuals are. If they're Americans, they need to be brought to justice.
2
What the Russians did -- and what the Americans are no doubt doing themselves, although we never hear about it -- is merely using the technology at hand to spread disinformation. That's hardly new, and the Russians didn't invent it. Maybe the Etruscans did, or the Egyptians, or the Athenians. Who knows? Gilding the lily and outright lying have been around for a long time, one way or another.
What's different is that in this age of almost effortless access to information, people seem more gullible than ever. I think I'm more inclined to blame our woes on a lousy education system, rather than dear old Vladimir Putin.
13
I guess the Times reporters here were just be extra cautious--as the Times has increasingly become--by pretending that this story is about equally bad players on the far right and left.
Of course, once the reporting continues we begin to the numbers, and, here's a shock, the deepest and most persistent offenders have been far right groups. And, if you drill down further, you will find that the far right 'disinformation' operates at a level of viciousness and cruelty that is, well, vicious and cruel.
Being precise about the level of character of participation is important for two reasons. First, it demonstrates that lots of 'dark money' is aimed at winning at any cost, including the integrity of the few institutions many of us still believe in.
Second, it is part of an increasingly synchronized effort to disrupt and distort the news, or basically the views of anyone but fellow travelers. It's how the Russians and the Trump crew found so much common ground.
It's not just irritating politics, it's a form of scorched earth anarchism that goes something like this: we're not happy with our share of the wealth so we're going to burn down the bank, but before it becomes ashes we grab all we can. They feel it belongs to them anyway, and they are aggrieved the losers on the left would question them.
7
I just checked FB and the accounts that FB was to have deactivated are still live. When are they to drop them?
7
I deactivated my Facebook account a few months ago. So far I only miss seeing family photos, but we are looking for a different venue. I plan to eventually delete it.
5
Stir up a stew filled with First Amendment rights; the large portion of the electorate which has been successfully dumbed down beyond the possibility of fact checking or critical thought, let along reading a serious book; the common tendency to agree with those who are expressing our own favorite biases; and the opportunity to profit from what you post on the internet -- and you can discover any number of online zines, newsletters, and blogs appealing to one extreme or the other.
My personal confirmation bias skews left, so I offer here a few samples which I read regularly as a kind of self-mortification, in the same spirit with which I force myself to watch a minimum of 15 minutes weekly of Hannity, Lou Dobbs, Laura Ingraham, Jeannine Piro, and others who slice and dice and boil to a pulp any truths which may be on the table, all seasoned with a kind of nastiness that humbles me.
https://townhall.com//columnists/kurtschlichter/2018/10/11/remember-that...? TOWNHALL.COM
https://www.dailychristiannews.com/kavanaugh-denies-second-allegation/? DAILY CHRISTIAN NEWS
https://www.patriotpollalerts.com/should-richard-blumenthal-resign/? PATRIOT POLL ALERTS
4
The GOP has gotta love this hurricane hoax that just happened in their panhandle.
Fake news.
Send them paper towels, it worked in Puerto Rico.
45
I am reminded of the many pamphleteers of the colonial days. Lies Rumors and occasionally truth. Internet is no different. Old school papers still are credible if no longer infallible. Just because a pretty ad pops up in your screen means zero
1
@Casey
Come on Casey. It is different, and the article you read just told you why. Hamilton would publish angry pamphlets that might reach 200 people. The world wide systems these folks are trying to explain to you mean its millions, tens of millions, in a flash.
6
Facebook should just pull the plug. It facilitates disinformation groups and has become a threat to democracy.
8
I think this is an accurate prediction and I am increasingly of the view that I should end my FB account and encourage others to do the same until FB recognizes the damage it is doing to America and institutes foolproof protections against all the false and fake posts and accounts they continue to support through an undisciplined if not downright dangerous platform.
2
If your going to report on the spread of misinformation for political gain you need to mention the recent article published as an “op-ed” by the President in USA Today. Examples include Democrats will outlaw private healthcare and let anyone cross the border.
28
What appalls me is that so many NYT readers are evidently untroubled by the casual invocation of the "domestic disinformation" rationale - which sounds like an edict from the State Security Service - to shut down their political opponents.
Do you know how many idiotic left-leaning Upworthy posts come across my FB feed, via highly educated friends? As ever, there is a kernel of truth to these things, which is distorted in the most sensational way to drive like-minded eyeballs. Sometimes I offer corrections and perspective, but usually I simply move on to something else. If FB gets bought out tomorrow by the Koch Brothers, I'm fairly certain that the enthusiasm in these comments for FB policing of political content will evaporate.
My position, however, will remain the same.
Pretty apparent who the frauds are because they presented with over a half million views in less than a few hours. Those are way over the natural numbers of either a Hannity or Morning Joe on YouTube. I shop for videos like I do everything. Valuations.
Especially nauseating were the actors pretending to be professors looking a lot like Dr. Ford, but actually scripted to sound like Jeanine Pirro. They pretended to hawk body language and witness evaluation skills, but anyone who checked in knew what they were getting, a hit piece. I suppose some liked it, but not so many as the viewing numbers suggested. It's a forced sort of thing, much like the GOP's dating strategies.
7
Every campaign ad does this, funded by both political parties. That it has been decoded by social media doesn’t make it new news. Folks, this is what they’ve been doing to us for decades!
2
Is it just me, or does there seem to be an ever-waning sense of critical thinking at the root of this problem?
8
@Marty Mcdonald
Americans are lazy. Lazy workers. Lazy thinkers.
1
Reality is not subjective. Get off of social media and make real connections with people, or else fall victim to the narcissus trap of alternative facts.
6
Overdue. Twitter needs to do much better; starting with Trump. Trump lies continuously;ban Trump from Twitter. Ray Sipe
42
Possible fix: Shutdown Facebook six months before every national election and/or fine them 100 million dollars for every fake site.
9
So the Sorcerer’s apprentices have become Masters.
6
Americans need to get their news from sources that have proven their accuracy and built their reputations over decades. It’s fine to supplement it with more questionable sources, but give 90% of the weight to the real sources. Stop getting news from Facebook and forwarded emails. If a news outlet does not have a daily corrections section, move on to other sources.
18
This is why we need critical reading skills starting in kindergarten, and retaught at every year level right up to the end of graduate school.
27
@krnewman
In Texas , a Republican legislator tried to get a law passed that prohibited teaching Critical Thinking in schools. In part it had to do with understanding that Evolution vs Creationism actually happened.
1
People like these false stories. They support their own feelings about the world. We all enjoy a bit of fantasy and an opportunity to feel outrage. It is entertainment.
It is a bit distressing trying to hold a conversation with people unable to discern fact from fiction. It is a bit frightening when this stuff drives actual physical responses, like electing Trump.
Americans shouldn't be coddled by big brother. We shouldn't be protected from propaganda. We need to just get better at recognizing it for what it is. It's called learning and it can be painful.
10
Russia exploited and amplified conditions existing in the American info-sphere. The fact that political operatives are using information warfare techniques developed for military purposes should come as no surprise. Also, Russia and other practicing nations will become better at concealing their hand in the operations.
12
And worse, I am terribly afraid something awful is going to happen to Maxine Waters! We must be on guard! @Ghost Dansing
1
So, if I made my living by ghost-writing books for famous people, or for some reason, I didn't want to publish under my own name, and instead published the book under the book subjects' name and/or one of my "pen names", and I then posted aggressively to Facebook according to a marketing plan set by the publishing house, would my account be subject to termination? (This happens all the time the physical world, and has been common practice for centuries. For example, "publius"?)
3
After reading this article and going on facebook to check out Reverb News and Resistance, l am alarmed. 1) Though l am closer in my politics to Reverb News and Resistance, l see no crossing the line issues with Right Wing News questioning why Professor Ford brought up her case or the veracity of the lie detector test she took. That is normal opinion writing. Claiming dems were bribed is ridiculous, but that kind of thing has been going on, at least, since my mother, deceased since 2011, started getting mailings claiming that Bill and Hillary Clinton were agents of the devil. Other example given seem more problematic... But 2) I really have problems with the two left leaning websites given as being somehow on equal terms with a website falsely claiming scores of muslim men being arrested. Were there merely one or two problematic pages on the left leaning sites removed? Because l see nothing on either two websites leading me to conclude fake or misleading news. Opinion, persuasion and evidence, yes. 1st amendment remember? What gives here? Shutting down these two websites is horrifyingly close to impermissable censorship. From this article l have no clear picture of what actions facebook has taken and leads me to question whether this article is either badly written or puposely misleading.
7
Wow!!!! Who couldn't see that coming. Lol
7
meanwhile, Democrats call for violence and violations of rights of Republican. media silent.
2
Please explain you claim, without using false information. Encouraging people to protest loudly against politicians who are doing things detrimental to the health of our country is just fine. Lawmakers should be uncomfortable when doing so. No one, unless you are listening to conspiracies, are calling for violence. Remember the dictatorial regimes that have taken hold in other countries when the opposition was too silent....
13
@bruce
Bot and paid for!
3
@bruce
Examples?
2
So it is not allowed that we question the veracity of someone like Blasey. Nor that we question the accuracy of her purported lie detector test. One is only allowed to "believe" Saint Blasey. After all, she's a Woman, a Survivor, accusing a white male!
However, her story keeps changing; and it is full of holes; and there are outright fabrications (fear of flying; claustrophobia; never advised someone how to cheat a polygraph test; etc, etc)
One lie begets another. That's why, before indicting someone, prosecutors and grand juries are supposed to look for inconsistencies and falsehoods in stories presented by accusers, be they civilians or cops. Be the accused black, brown or (not) white male.
There are plenty of other ways for us to communicate, other than social media. There are plenty of other ways for us to deal with false accusations. There are plenty of other ways to smash witch hunts. None will be pleasant. But they will be real, and they will be effective. Enough is enough.
4
Anybody who relies on Facebook for news isn't interested in the truth.
I don't know if people are willingly gullible or simply conspiracy minded, but I do know this: the reason this country is falling down on any number of social and economic parameters is people aren't interested in developing critical research skills.
165
@ChristineMcM -- Critical research skills really aren't needed. In most cases, a quick Google or Bing is more than enough to establish the truth.
1
It seems the American entrepreneurial spirit is at work. One can go as far as their imagination allows and if profit can be obtained, then the creation of disturbing fiction it is downright patriotic. Someone is on trial and the jury must decide the facts when truth is relative.
1
Pandora's box is now wide open, and it was inevitable while social media frameworks are structured as they are currently. They should have an arm that fact checks purported news and tags them with a truth rating or the like, at the very least. There really is a difference between opinion and fact. The social networks should not be the most efffective medium for spreading lies ever seen.
9
Yes. Something awful is going to happen to Maxine Waters, I am afraid. Something really horrible. I mean really awful. It will be terrible. @Barry Williams
1
Facebook isn't very good at culling fake accounts. I've had one for years. It's my only FB account because I've never wanted to join. I just use it to look at other people's FB pages. I stay in touch with my family via FaceTime. Everything on my FB is fake.
9
@Hychkok There's no reason for Facebook to remove your account because every time you log in to "look at other people's pages," you're another advertising impression for them. They're very good about removing blatantly fake, spammy and malicious accounts, however.
When it comes to removing things like "Right Wing News" or "The Resistance," that's when they get into uncharted territory because they're being put in a position to determine what's fake and subjectively or objectively true.
1
Everybody needs to get off of Facebook - KNOW who they are listening to and reading - we are in Orwellian times and this is alarming and appalling.
55
@Kim Anderson That's not how Facebook works, but okay!
I deleted my account. Don't miss it.
1
And then there's the guy at the very top of this steamy heap of disinformation and disregard for truth and social ethics who carny-barked and gaslighted roughly 1/3 of the U.S. into being his followers...
68
I'm sure Trump told Putin, at their meeting in Helsinki, "Thanks for the help but we've got it from here."
18
Tell Vladimir I will have more flexibility after the election...Barack Obama. And who knows what awful thing could happen to Maxine Waters after this? Something really terrible. Really. We have to be on guard! @Rick Gage
The republicans will do anything to make the Russia probe appear to be a witch hunt, including paying Americans to float crazy conspiracy theories or confuse the American voting population. Truly scary that anyone would pay attention to such centrifuge.
5
People who lived through WW2 in Europe and their children’s children see what’s going on in this country.
I know my mother fled with her parents from a polical party that put itself first before its country’s citizens.
Sad to say it will take a huge catastrophe situation where millions of lives are lost before anything will change.
That is how they learned...Americans are so naive and have had it too good.
93
Why was FOX News omitted from this article. They spew partisan disinformation everyday and by far are the worst offender.
212
Are we ever going to evolve beyond malevolence and gleeful wrongdoing? We have so many so-called adults on this planet who behave like animals and unmannered children. We have language and culture and intellect, but we're still the worst species on this planet. The worst.
49
This is not an exclusive situation that somehow right wing groups are using. Take for example the NYT, which references groups like " the resistance" via Facebook as an offender in this article, while there is no reference to left wing.
Disinformation takes place everywhere.
Ultimately, there is no replacement for common sense... Don't take anything from any source as accurate on face value, cross-reference, and question, question, question. Don't let anyone tell you they are the source.
12
@Cromwell
When Lindsay Graham tells you once a Cosby, always a Cosby, he does humanity a HUGE injury. Misinformation is not only cruel, it is unjust.
Science can tell us what's happening.
https://www.csbsju.edu/Documents/Counseling%20and%20Health%20Promotions/...
15% of boys/men attempt sexual assault by age 25, and 5% of them succeed to rape. Most males never attempt it again, but 2% continue to rape like Cosby. Those who adopt his tactics are the most prolific of rapists.
So it is likely we will lose a lot more men in high positions of leadership who must bend to corporate standards while the US government runs itself like the Catholic Church. However, it is not true a Cosby will always remain a Cosby. Most fall prey to bad guidance, do wrong, then right themselves.
2
At least FB is taking steps to catch these liars. Left or right, I don't care - spreading rumors and lies is utterly wrong, and FB, Twitter, Reddit, and other social media forums need better monitoring and probably even regulation. The propaganda emails from PACs are frightening, too. How many people read these hysterical diatribes and take them seriously? At least newspapers and television have some kind of standards, but the Internet has become a refuge for people who are crazy, stupid, or both, and who cannot tell the difference between truth and lies -- or worse, do not care about the difference.
3
We have a president who can hold up one finger to them, but tell his followers he's holding up four, and every one of them will blindly believe him instead of their own eyes.
...and any news organization that reports differently will be branded traitorous liars, enemies of the people, and "fake news"
94
Yes, something awful might happen to Maxine Waters. I mean awful, really terrible...oh my god! @Jet Gardmer
FoxNews had this idea long ago.
139
Sinful. It is obvious that our entire nation is rapidly sliding into total chaos. When you can't trust the news, you can't trust those elected to represent you (65% of Americans were opposed to Kavanaugh, majority want ACA to continue, don't like our immigration, tactics, don't trust police, and most Americans are tumbling into financial disaster, we are really in trouble. This story will keep many voters at home, because even campaigning isn't going to be trustworthy. I fear for the country that my grandchildren are going to inherit. We are very close to a precipice that we might not be able to pull back from.
35
@Mountain Dragonfly If people just used a little bit of common sense, none of this would be a problem. It's all because people would rather read headlines than read a full story and form a judgment for themselves.
1
As was reported here, and you surely remember, polls showed that Americans were against the ACA when it passed.
And continually disfavored it until Trump won and tried to change it.
President Obama knew this. Was he and other Dens being undemocratic by refusing to obey the public will?
And, don't blame Bush for Afganistan and Iraq. Polls showed Americans wanted it. Dems voted for it, probably for that reason.....
I don't want our government to govern based on polls. To me that's foolish.
But I do understand people that follow the herd. It's easier. But it is a fickle herd! lol
As critical thinking and comprehension wane a fondness of facsism grows. Why be bothered with complex thoughts and nuanced understandings when you can have someone tell you indisputable "truths" while you absorb more and more "reality" entertainment? We, as a nation, have been stepping further and further onto a slippery slope that leads to the complete commandeering of what is left of our republic by monied interests.
Please vote, tell people to vote, chastise people for not voting, and hound politicians to expand voting rights/access. It's the only chance we have left.
Cheers.
77
@Aaron Pryzbek
I completely agree with your idea that a decline in critical thinking and comprehension is linked to a fondness for fascism -- or certainly to any flavor of propaganda used to foster totalitarianism of either the left or right variety.
One major cause of this dumbing down of the electorate is that our educational institutions have been deliberately undernourished (no accident, I think, that reactionary forces in red states have starved their public schools for decades, while feeding at the public trough filled by tax dollars from populous, affluent blue states)
Whether television and other popular entertainment have colluded in this dumbing down, or have simply sunk to meet their audiences, we are now facing a poorly educated or uneducated citizenry,which Jefferson warned against as inimicable to a free society.
In this election in particular, we want all enlightened voters to go to the polls, and in every election, we want our "patriotic" politicians to be stopped from limiting voter rights .
And we want to improve the quality of education for every child and young person in this nation.
But I am sorry to say I'm not so sure I want to encourage the aptly named deplorables to exercise their franchise until critical thinking becomes a basic aspect of all education.
3
@Aaron Pryzbek to quote: Why be bothered with complex thoughts and nuanced understandings when you can have someone tell you indisputable "truths"
An excellent analysis of liberal controlled Main Stream Media in USA. Keep bombarding the masses with a coordinated narrative and they will believe it. Thankfully, it only worked on half the country.
3
Yes. Over simplified false narratives, like the climate has one measureable output, averaged surface temperature and one driving input, man made CO2. You are finally seeing the light @Dan M
This news report is completely unsettling. Now we have Americans using propaganda against Americans? What is the solution to the problem of online 'Fake News'? I wish I had an answer short of the serious regulation of Facebook content. Somehow, abuse of social media to spread fake news needs to end.
64
@RogerHWerner
Why are you in the least surprised? This kind of stuff is as American as apple pie. Just as Russian election interference, while very real, comes a distant second to the home-grown variety. Voter suppression is a long-established practice, that was given an instant boost when the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act.
@RogerHWerner
The solution is education in critical thinking skills beginning in elementary school and continuing through college.