Chi Onwurah, the Labour MP and chair of the science and technology committee for the House of Commons, which is investigating how online disinformation fuelled last summer’s riots, said Zuckerberg’s decision to replace professional factcheckers with users policing the accuracy of posts was “concerning” and “quite frightening”.
“To hear that Meta is removing all its factcheckers [in the US] is concerning … people have a right to be protected from the harmful effects of misinformation,” she said.
It is not true that Tractor Production Statistics have been missed! Shoot the Wreckers!
It would be nice to protect MPs from the harmful effects of misinformation. The “race to net zero” implying there’s a contest, a goal, and perhaps a lesser reward for being second and nowt for last. Or austerity has been tried and doesn’t work. How to set up their misinformation protection system though, haven’t a scooby.
By MP standards she’s actually reasonably qualified to head the science and technology committee.
That does not give her standing to pontificate about alleged misinformation posted on social media – unless you consider her pre-political employment with OFCOM which would regrettably make her an expert in the eyes of much of the establishment.
Amazing to think how the boy Wales ever managed to get Wikipedia up and running.
I wonder whether it is because or despite her degree in ElecEng that she’s an absolute thicko.
As to “Fact Checking” one of the most depressing aspects of this whole nonsense down the years has been listening to the utter morons ( ie BBC ) who claimed that these people were independent or neutral . It is a big contributor to me stopping watching TV or listening to Radio 4.
And Zuck. ? Well it’s amazing what the possibility of 20 years in chokey for First Amendment breaches will do to a chap’s outlook.
Starmernator has been programmed with a new set of stock euphemisms:
“Lies and misinformation” = moslems have been raping and torturing young white girls for decades and those in authority knew but did nothing about it for fear of being called racist or upsetting ‘community cohesion’,
or
“Far Right Thuggery” = the white working class, who have been told for decades to shut the fuck up about the transformation of their country into Pakistan 2.0, going onto the streets after the murder of three more children to make their feelings known,
and more recently
“Far Right Bandwagon” = the majority of the people, who did not know about the moslem rape gangs but now they do, want an inquiry.
It would be nice to protect MPs from the harmful effects of misinformation. The “race to net zero” implying there’s a contest, a goal, and perhaps a lesser reward for being second and nowt for last. Or austerity has been tried and doesn’t work. How to set up their misinformation protection system though, haven’t a scooby.
I propose a system where MPs (and since anyone can become an MP, everyone should benefit from it, that way we get economies of scale and i think it would benefit us all if everyone could do this) go to an institution for a number of years. Studies would suggest early in life is better.
At these institutions, people would be taught to think critically and how to teach themselves.
It could last for a number of years, with several stages, each getting harder but allowing those with less academic ability and more practical aptitudes to leave with qualifications and train a skill.
We could call it school.
There are 9 facts which have to be learned, inwardly digested and regurgitated at regular intervals. Any facts written or spoken that are not from the list are verboten and forbidden on pain of excommunication. Purveyors of any facts not on the list facts are to be jailed, discredited or silenced by any means available. If necessary, the body must be cremated to remove any traces…
Note that the professional fact-checkers were all in place, ‘checking the facts’, when the summer riots occurred. At the Beeb they still are. How effective are professional fact checkers, then?
An empirical line of thought one would hope would occur to a graduate in electrical engineering.
Before the internet, people outside of the mainstream media had to really work hard to publish newsletters, fanzines and the like. People had to work hard to find audiences, everything from taking out adds in other peoples magazines to handing out leaflets and fanzines at conventions.
The internet has created a level playing field where a tin pot outfit can put together a web site that looks as good as the Guardians.
We’ve grown used to politicians burbling on about “misinformation and disinformation” (they always like to say both, don’t they?) and have forgotten to laugh like drains when they do so.
Most journalists are their pompous accomplices in this, and should be treated the same.
Good. I hope that she is indeed concerned and frightened.
– How effective are professional fact checkers, then?
We did learn that the little girls were murdered by Doctor Who after xe regenerated as a schoolboy; that the Doctor is Welsh; and that Wales is in the Congo*.
So pretty effective in a way.
* we might have already known that one
The ever vigilant Paul Homewood is working free of charge as an independent fact checker for the BBC. The BBC’s own fact checkers don’t seem to be doing their jobs.
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2025/01/02/bbc-extreme-weather-complaint/
And anyone who thinks he’s doing this because of Trump really hasn’t been paying attention. Zuckerberg has been complaining about the cost of fact checking and he’s losing out on the richest man stakes to Musk.
Trump is the excuse, cost is the reason.
There are close a to a billion voices on Twitter. Listening to any one of them can be like overhearing the pub bore going on about faked moon landings. But when the journalists and “fact checkers” of the BBC and other bits of the MSM speak, they still carry a certain authority with many (not anyone on this blog obv). That’s the difference.
Hmm, one of my posts seems to have gone walkabout so I’ll try again.
Instead of worrying about social media where caveat emptorshould apply they should take a look at outr own broadcast news which is supposed to be trustworthy. This is David Spiegelhalter:
My daughter had a toy Noah’s Ark toy too.
My Dad was a medical systems engineer, and after a fundamental breakthrough in the mid-1970s was interviewed on Look North. He came back fuming, they’d asked “asanine questions” and been completely oblivious to what he’d done, and he vowed never to interact with “the meeja” ever again.
Neither Zuck nor Facebook are governments or government agencies, so the First Amendment doesn’t apply. Zuck is not required to allow your speech on his platform, nor is he even required to allow you to view the speech carried on it.