| > What if it's not the news that's false, but memes and public opinion? Uhm, but it's not. The article is about the objectively false content, as in: An article says something happened that objectively did not occur, or claims someone said something that they did not say. > Are we going to start silencing opinion, because it's not factual? And it's not about this either - anyone is free to keep sharing objectively false content on the platform. The change is that FB will no longer pay for content that is made up and does not make it clear that this is the case. > Almost nothing comes down to just True and False Indeed. As I said in another thread the other day - this is a hard problem and the answer is not, as I assume you're insinuating, that my ignorance is as good as your knowledge. Ignorance and lies should not be given equal weight and attention as factual statements and informed commentary by the media. This is a solved problem, the courts make life-or-death decisions on patently subjective issues every hour. Any reputable school of journalism will be happy to give you detailed explanations for how to navigate the real world of truthisms, he-saids and halfway facts, they've been thinking about this for hundreds of years. |