Facebook announced today it now has a dedicated space just for news, and it's receiving mixed reactions. How do you feel about it? Will you use Facebook's Newsroom to catch up on current affairs?
True editorial independence is defined as ââŠthe freedom of editors to make decisions without interference from the owners of a publication. Editorial independence is tested, for instance, if a newspaper runs articles that may be unpopular with its advertising clientele or critical of its ownership.â I donât see Facebook ever adopting this mantra. Theyâve just picked up a buzz word and dribbled it all slipshod down the court only to blow an easy layup.
Yeesh - interesting timing, Facebook! Given all the negative press they've had recently around spreading misinformation and not regulating political ads this feels kinda icky. I feel like there are tons of credible news sources out there with much clearer incentives and transparent motives for disseminating information objectively and I'd rather go there for news if I'm honest. Facebook makes great products but I wouldn't trust their news to be unbiased, fact checked etc.
That said, there are a number of highly intelligent people I know who work at Facebook and whose values I align with. I don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Curious to see what others think.
The problem I have with this is that it doesnât put me in control of curating my own preferences for information sources. Why do I need to be at the mercy of what some journalist finds newsworthy?
I also donât trust journalists any more than I trust Zuckerberg. They are people. People with bias and motives that are likely counter to my own. Iâll stick to books and Tweets.
I will never go to social media to get news or argue with people. So many better ways to catch up on current affairs. Also, it's interesting. I feel as there's a wave of people who are on facebook and who are not (Younger than 21 are really not on it). Outside of US Facebook is still strong but truly losing value here in the US (5 million users deleted or deactivated their account here)
Still bad for news. Amazon and widgets = Facebook and news. Rent-taking centralized middlemen owning producer relationship w customer. Too much concentrated power.
I understand where FB wins, their algorithm is the gate keeper - theyâll gather marketing data on clicks, what you read, how long - build profiles,package and sell.
How do the publishers and newsfeeds win?
Surely, they are just reduced to content generators for FB. Researched fact journalism will sit side-by-side with opinion/commentary/propaganda - just look at realclearpolitics to see how thatâll work out.
I use Feedly and read a broad range.
The just added Breitbart as a trusted news source and accepted the Daily Caller (white nationalist site) as a 3rd party fact checker. See Popular newsletter for how they are allowing Ben Shapiro to amplify against their own terms of service. All of this points to this being more of a propaganda network than a news feed.
Journalism is based on spreading facts, albeit tinged with bias in the use of language and subject selection. Those sites above are telling outright lies to push a alt-right political agenda, and are easily fact checked for complete falsehoods. It is not a benefit to society to spread lies legitimized by wrapping them in a "news feed".
While I strongly believe we should allow people with those views to freely express themselves on facebook, this format will only further the ignorance, hate, and partisanship that is already so prevalent in this country, by giving them cover and further amplification.
No, thank you! There are better unedited and unbiased news apps/websites. If they have curators, they should try using their skills to weed out false information (fact-check) in political campaigns and ads on Facebook.