Considering the amount of noise and info- / culture-wars out there about this story, responses may be moderated strictly to stick to factual analysis only, rather than propaganda.
But suffice it to stay, if you're really looking for the only literally correct answer to your question of "who is giving fake news", it's obviously Meta: the amount of fake news that has been shared globally on its platform over the last decade (and the lies it has told in pursuit of its agenda and erosion of user privacy) surely dwarfs the fake news output of all the printing presses in the world...
Appreciate the sentiment; but the OP is obviously seeking opinions on the "truth" in the present case alone, i.e., the ongoing Meta Vs The Wire war. Pontificating on the evils of Meta in general really isnt required. Pretty muuch everyone knows about their transgressions over the last decade. You would do well to stick to your own guidelines of sticking to factual analysis.
The question OP asked was literally, "who is giving fake news". Well, asked and answered, Facebook / Meta "gives" a lot more fake news than anyone else. Even if they don't produce it themselves, they certainly disseminate a lot of it and profit from it, that sure sounds like they're "giving" quite a bit of it.
In her testimony Haugen blamed engagement-based ranking for “literally fanning ethnic violence” in countries like Ethiopia. “Facebook … knows, they have admitted in public, that engagement-based ranking is dangerous without integrity and security systems, but then not rolled out those integrity and security systems to most of the languages in the world,” Haugen said. And that’s what is causing things like ethnic violence in Ethiopia.”
Comment by legally India ought to be moderated and deleted first.
Meta is a platform. Not a publisher. Meta may program its content engine to show content that users like. Also 'recommending' content is not publication because at the end of the day the users of the platform publish the content.
Also, it's obnoxious to use the (alleged) wrong of one party to answer the (alleged) wrong of another party. By alleging Meta indulged in spreading fake news, you are covering up the (alleged) publication of fake news by 'The Wire'. You are breaking down all norms of logical reasoning and rules in your attempt to polarize perspectives against Meta.
That's fit enough reason to moderate that comment out of existence.
Legally India: we moderate comments to avoid any and all liability hahaha hope you understand 👍👍👍
Meta: [acts as an intermediary should] allows content on so long as reports do not come in.
Legally India: aha look at Meta publishing fake news aha.
Seems strange that legal india (which should be the first one to understand how intermediary liability works) is out and out saying that a true intermediary is actively “publishing” fake news in the pursuit of some agenda. Maybe a refresher on how much fake news is manafactured by media houses we rely on everyday is required —all the content we accuse Meta of publishing is simply content published by everyday individuals on the platform. Simply visit your family WhatsApp group to undertake this if you’re still wondering. Painting a platform as a culprit for our own sins is easy
Dear Moderator, The Wire goofed up and has taken down its articles on Meta. Guess you have generalised your responses like a LW, instead of being a Moderator who is even, but the truth in this case is otherwise.
Always good to keep perceptions outside judgements! Lesson for future moderation.
We never moderated facts or professed an opinion besides the fact that Facebook is and will for a long time be the biggest 'giver' of fake news, as was asked. Oh, and we also moderated posts by trolls less interested in facts and more in posting liberal troll bait. Thank you for participating 😀
LOL. What a biased moderator! It is the job of a moderator/journalist to stay strictly neutral and not comment on any discussions. That's what Kian used to do and you should do that too, pal.
Many US tech experts have disputed the Wire's version. Their tweets have been compiled by OpIndia here:
Meta is evil, no doubt. But The Wire has shown itself to be utterly incompetent in this shoddy reportage. Hope the new media space in India introspects. If they lose credibility, then there's no one to hold power to account.
Any sane person (which obviously excludes work zealots) will side with Meta. They have stated that the email id is not the one used and you can also see that the email is clearly in Indian English. Most of all, are we so f-ing dumb to believe that a multi-billion company takes orders from Amit Malviya, who isn't even a councillor?
It is not a far stretch by any means: Facebook (and other social media companies, Twitter included) have routinely courted governments and given them special access to data, their advertisement targeting algorithms or looked the other way while others exploited their algorithms (already forgotten about the Cambridge Analytica scandal, for which FB was literally fined billions? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook%E2%80%93Cambridge_Analytica_data_scandal )
The Wire may have been got it wrong or they may have been the victim of an elaborate fake news campaign themselves or they may have got it right.
What is surprising though is 'everyone' suddenly having forgotten that Facebook does NOT deal in shady dealings. 😂
I have corresponded with people working at meta as little as a month ago and they used fb.com emails. When meta starts lying about that they lose credibility.
Moderator does not feel slapped and stands by earlier comment that Meta is indeed a proven bigger 'giver' of Fake news than any single publication or social media platform in the world and that Meta as a company also regularly lies.
"In our own initial review, we recognized there were some inconsistencies. The fact that this expert that one of our researchers said he spoke to for the video verification of the DKIM test has now said publicly he wasn't part of this process made us decide that look, we need to review what happened."
FYI, your comment was marked trollish because of the last two lines.
The (intentionally) disingenuous thing in the Wire trolling has been that it was never about this specific story (which had just enough elements of truth based on previous whistleblower leaks on Facebook to be almost believable), but is gleefully used by opponents of The Wire to denigrate ALL their past and future coverage.
However, if the Wire was a "fake news" outlet (or even "Fake News", as you call it), the Wire would not have issued this retraction and have been investigating and responding to the criticisms. As it's traditionally understood (rather than being used by trolls as a term to denigrate publications they disagree with), a news outlet does not become 'Fake News' (tm) as soon as it has made a mistake in a story. Mistakes happen in journalism, because journalism is complicated.
However, it appears that they were misled and fell for a relatively sophisticated scam (which yes, they should have spotted and can be criticsed for), and did unintentionally publish incorrect / false news (in this instance), or at least news which was not sufficiently sourced. That is arguably one of the worst nightmare of any journalist.
Who duped them and for what reasons will therefore likely be the more interesting story in the long run.
Hallo, looks like people got bored of the Wire story for now (though it will certainly be milked and memed for far longer than its best by date by you :)
Can you imagine what would have happened if OpIndia/Swarajya had published this fake story and not the Wire? There would be global outrage by the lefties. Nothing happening here. Just shows the double standards of the lib/woke brigade.
Yes, it's easy to imagine, because at least OpIndia publish fake news very regularly, so much so that most 'wokes' have given up fact checking them other than in particularly egregious cases (and the ones that do, like AltNews or Newslaundry, get systematically trolled and worse for it...)
A legit criticism with AltNews, however, is that they rarely if ever fact-check the left-leaning media, and haven't covered the Wire story (yet?). Two possible reasons for that: 1) their mission / bias is to keep a check on right-wing fake news (which is arguably much more organised and successful at spreading its message in India), or 2) most mainstream left wing media does not publish fake news as often?
But on point 2, honest question: if you feel like The Wire or others are regularly publishing fake news, then are there any serious 'right-of-spectrum' fact checking websites, that actually do credible research on wrong stories and have made it their mission to do so? If not, why not?
But suffice it to stay, if you're really looking for the only literally correct answer to your question of "who is giving fake news", it's obviously Meta: the amount of fake news that has been shared globally on its platform over the last decade (and the lies it has told in pursuit of its agenda and erosion of user privacy) surely dwarfs the fake news output of all the printing presses in the world...
See also: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/oct/07/facebooks-role-in-myanmar-and-ethiopia-under-new-scrutiny
Quote:
Meta is a platform. Not a publisher. Meta may program its content engine to show content that users like. Also 'recommending' content is not publication because at the end of the day the users of the platform publish the content.
Also, it's obnoxious to use the (alleged) wrong of one party to answer the (alleged) wrong of another party. By alleging Meta indulged in spreading fake news, you are covering up the (alleged) publication of fake news by 'The Wire'. You are breaking down all norms of logical reasoning and rules in your attempt to polarize perspectives against Meta.
That's fit enough reason to moderate that comment out of existence.
Meta: [acts as an intermediary should] allows content on so long as reports do not come in.
Legally India: aha look at Meta publishing fake news aha.
Seems strange that legal india (which should be the first one to understand how intermediary liability works) is out and out saying that a true intermediary is actively “publishing” fake news in the pursuit of some agenda. Maybe a refresher on how much fake news is manafactured by media houses we rely on everyday is required —all the content we accuse Meta of publishing is simply content published by everyday individuals on the platform. Simply visit your family WhatsApp group to undertake this if you’re still wondering. Painting a platform as a culprit for our own sins is easy
https://www.newslaundry.com/2022/10/13/explained-whats-the-wire-vs-meta-fight-all-about
Dear Moderator, The Wire goofed up and has taken down its articles on Meta. Guess you have generalised your responses like a LW, instead of being a Moderator who is even, but the truth in this case is otherwise.
Always good to keep perceptions outside judgements! Lesson for future moderation.
Cheers
Many US tech experts have disputed the Wire's version. Their tweets have been compiled by OpIndia here:
https://www.opindia.com/2022/10/the-wire-uses-photohsoped-screenshots-of-emails-to-target-meta/
Provides link to the biggest fake news site other than altnews in the same breath.
Irony dies a quiet death.
The wire has to.
I think that should answer your question. Thank you, next.
The Wire may have been got it wrong or they may have been the victim of an elaborate fake news campaign themselves or they may have got it right.
What is surprising though is 'everyone' suddenly having forgotten that Facebook does NOT deal in shady dealings. 😂
https://www.gawker.com/5636765/facebook-ceo-admits-to-calling-users-dumb-fucks
https://twitter.com/pranesh/status/1582197482615758851
https://slate.com/technology/2022/10/india-facebook-wire-meta-journalism.html
Moderator does not feel slapped and stands by earlier comment that Meta is indeed a proven bigger 'giver' of Fake news than any single publication or social media platform in the world and that Meta as a company also regularly lies.
Vardarajan says:
"In our own initial review, we recognized there were some inconsistencies. The fact that this expert that one of our researchers said he spoke to for the video verification of the DKIM test has now said publicly he wasn't part of this process made us decide that look, we need to review what happened."
https://www.platformer.news/p/the-wire-pulls-its-meta-stories
The Wire = Fake News
QED.
The (intentionally) disingenuous thing in the Wire trolling has been that it was never about this specific story (which had just enough elements of truth based on previous whistleblower leaks on Facebook to be almost believable), but is gleefully used by opponents of The Wire to denigrate ALL their past and future coverage.
However, if the Wire was a "fake news" outlet (or even "Fake News", as you call it), the Wire would not have issued this retraction and have been investigating and responding to the criticisms. As it's traditionally understood (rather than being used by trolls as a term to denigrate publications they disagree with), a news outlet does not become 'Fake News' (tm) as soon as it has made a mistake in a story. Mistakes happen in journalism, because journalism is complicated.
However, it appears that they were misled and fell for a relatively sophisticated scam (which yes, they should have spotted and can be criticsed for), and did unintentionally publish incorrect / false news (in this instance), or at least news which was not sufficiently sourced. That is arguably one of the worst nightmare of any journalist.
Who duped them and for what reasons will therefore likely be the more interesting story in the long run.
Big joke on them for overlooking editorial overview. Thisaan proved they also work for trp but with certain ideology.
https://www.altnews.in/?s=opindia
https://www.altnews.in/?s=swarajya
https://www.newslaundry.com/search?q=opindia
https://www.newslaundry.com/search?q=swarajya
A legit criticism with AltNews, however, is that they rarely if ever fact-check the left-leaning media, and haven't covered the Wire story (yet?). Two possible reasons for that: 1) their mission / bias is to keep a check on right-wing fake news (which is arguably much more organised and successful at spreading its message in India), or 2) most mainstream left wing media does not publish fake news as often?
Newslaundry tries to be fairly balanced on both sides of the spectrum and has covered the Wire story extensively and in a balanced manner: https://www.newslaundry.com/search?q=wire and also covers for instance NDTV and other mainstream stories where they get it wrong https://www.newslaundry.com/search?q=ndtv
But on point 2, honest question: if you feel like The Wire or others are regularly publishing fake news, then are there any serious 'right-of-spectrum' fact checking websites, that actually do credible research on wrong stories and have made it their mission to do so? If not, why not?
▮▮▮
And now, The Wire retracts Tek Fog story (same story was cited by think tanks to lower India's FOE ranking)
https://www.thenewsminute.com/article/wire-retracts-meta-stories-tek-fog-investigation-be-reviewed-too-169165
https://youtu.be/2uzfKbdbugY
https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1631338653707378702
Only ▮▮▮ has covered it so far. Silence from "liberal" media.
▮▮▮
And yet the Wire is "trustworthy" media?