US President Barack Obama, facing the imminent handover to his bombastic successor, had plenty to be concerned about last week. However, he took time to express concern about the impact of fake news online when he spoke to reporters on Thursday.
Obama, who was described in a detailed New Yorker interview as being “obsessed” with the problem since the election, outlined the new ecosystem of news online in which “everything is true and nothing is true.”
“In an age where there’s so much active misinformation, and it’s packaged very well, and it looks the same when you see it on a Facebook page or you turn on your television, where some over-zealousness on the part of a US official is equated with constant and severe repression elsewhere, if everything seems to be the same and no distinctions are made, then we won’t know what to protect,” Obama said.
Illustration: Mountain People
Obama is not exaggerating.
Worse yet, in the last weeks of the US election campaign, according to an analysis by Buzzfeed News, fake news — whether claiming that the pope had endorsed US president-elect Donald Trump or that Democratic candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton sold weapons to the Islamic State group — actually outperformed real news on the platform, with more shares, reactions and comments.
Another widely shared story used a young picture of Trump with variations on a quote that he reportedly gave People magazine in 1998: “If I were to run, I’d run as a Republican. They’re the dumbest group of voters in the country. They believe anything on Fox News. I could lie and they’d still eat it up. I bet my numbers would be terrific.”
Yet Trump never said that. It is not even possible to know how widely the quote was shared, with a new version created every time another is flagged and removed.
Memes like this replicate across the Internet like a virus in this way, so the quote, tantalizing in its plausibility and pitch-perfect for quick sharing, has been shared hundreds of thousands, potentially millions of times.
Facebook has faced many controversies in its 12 short years, but has fumbled with the gravity and impact of its editorial power in an age where 62 percent of US adults turn to social media for some or all of their news, according to the Pew Research Center.
In the early days of the US election, Facebook was criticized for what was perceived as over-zealous curation of its “trending topics” chart. When conservative outlets accused it of censoring right-leaning news stories, Facebook chief executive Mark Zuckerberg fired the trending stories team and replaced them with an algorithm — which almost immediately began to distribute fake news.
The problem went unaddressed.
Sources told technology Web site Gizmodo that high-level meetings at Facebook have been under way since May, when a planned update to identify fake news was shelved after it was found to disproportionately impact right-wing sites, although Facebook officially denies that this happened.
Part of the problem, experts say, is that many people share articles based on the headline alone and do not even read the story — let alone apply any skepticism to the claims within.
Another viral story by the “Denver Guardian” claimed, completely falsely, that an FBI agent investigating Clinton had been killed in a house fire in Colorado.
It prompted the Denver Post — a newspaper that does actually exist and was founded in 1892 — to explain that “there is no such thing as the Denver Guardian,” pointing out that the address it listed as its base led to a tree in a Denver car park.
In one way, the problem is not a new one. Publications such as the National Enquirer in the US have long bent the truth, often shamelessly.
However, now a fake story can much more easily masquerade as real, because in Facebook’s walled garden, all the posts look largely the same — a New York Times investigation alongside a fake story claiming Taylor Swift endorsed Trump.
The ease of deception has given birth to a brand new cottage industry.
This month, Buzzfeed discovered that many of the pro-Trump fake news sites — more than 100 of them — were being operated as for-profit click-farms by Macedonian teenagers.
By Nov. 5, Zuckerberg was facing mounting pressure to address the problem.
“Of all the content on Facebook, more than 99 percent of what people see is authentic. Only a very small amount is fake news and hoaxes,” he wrote on his Facebook page. “The hoaxes that do exist are not limited to one partisan view, or even to politics. Overall, this makes it extremely unlikely hoaxes changed the outcome of this election in one direction or the other.”
Experts say this statement sounds like Zuckerberg is in denial.
“As long as Mark Zuckerberg refuses to understand his own system, there is no hope for Facebook reforming itself,” University of Virginia professor of media studies Siva Vaidhyanathan said. “Facebook and its leaders have consistently applauded themselves for connecting millions of people around the world and enabling friction-free conversation, and have gladly taken unwarranted credit for pro-democracy movements in different parts of the world, and yet Zuckerberg himself has denied any moral responsibility for the fact that Facebook has helped poison American democracy.”
The problem is not just limited to the latest US presidential election cycle, Vaidyanathan said.
“The harmful information that spreads on Facebook includes the myths and lies about vaccination and links to autism. It contains myths and lies about the scientific fact of global warming. These are issues that are crucial to our well-being and there is no algorithm that can distinguish a fact from a lie,” he said.
On Monday, Google and Facebook both announced that they would be making it harder for fake news sites to make money via their advertising networks — though this does not address Facebook’s news feed problem.
Pressure continues to grow, even from within Facebook itself.
A report emerged on Monday that a “renegade” group of “more than dozens” of Facebook employees had formed a task force, kept secret from upper management, to try to address the issue.
“[Zuckerberg] knows, and those of us at the company know, that fake news ran wild on our platform during the entire campaign season,” one Facebook employee anonymously told Buzzfeed.
Hundreds more had privately expressed dissatisfaction with how the company had dealt with the problem.
Merrimack College assistant professor of communication and media Melissa Zimdars said that she was concerned about some of the sources her students in Massachusetts were finding and using online, so she created a Google document which lists a number of sites and which has since gone viral.
Not all are fake. Many are satirical sites like The Onion or the New Yorker’s Borowitz Report, while others are news organizations whose stories are often slanted, like Breitbart on the right or Occupy Democrats on the left.
“There are things that readers can do, but there are [also] things structurally and within the culture of journalism itself that need to change,” Zimdars said. “One thing readers can do is to read what they’re sharing, and after that if you read something and have a strong reaction to it, read more about it rather than just accept what you originally read as complete information.”
The only solution to Facebook’s problem is the laborious and labor-intensive human checking of facts, Vaidhyanathan said.
“Facebook would have to hire thousands of human beings who are trained to make editorial judgements, and could step in and edit news feeds,” he said.
In the meantime, it is as if Zuckerberg is using some different version of Facebook unafflicted by hoax stories and misinformation.
“The rest of us know too well the corrosive power of fake news,” Vaidhyanathan said.
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
Taiwan People’s Party Legislator-at-large Liu Shu-pin (劉書彬) asked Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) a question on Tuesday last week about President William Lai’s (賴清德) decision in March to officially define the People’s Republic of China (PRC), as governed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), as a foreign hostile force. Liu objected to Lai’s decision on two grounds. First, procedurally, suggesting that Lai did not have the right to unilaterally make that decision, and that Cho should have consulted with the Executive Yuan before he endorsed it. Second, Liu objected over national security concerns, saying that the CCP and Chinese President Xi
RSS