Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Because there is a shocking percentage of people who believe "It must be true; I read it on the internet", I am glad to see that at least an option to "fact check" is being offered. While many (including me) believe the number or percentage of people who will choose to use the feature may be small, at least an attempt is being made to encourage users to consider that you can't believe everything you hear. That's not a bad thing.
 
No it isn't. A private company doing something isn't the same as the government doing it. You can regulate companies.
Private companies have the freedom to do as they please in this regard. That doesn't negate the fact that the outcomes are still the same if not worse... These companies have massive influence over the average individual in terms of making them think a certain way and making them believe certain things. It's the ultimate outcome that you should be worried or at least think about, not what type of entity is doing the indoctrination.

Luckily, there are no "equally qualified experts" telling a "contrary version of events" regarding COVID.

Oh but yes there are. Perhaps the news sources from which you get your information do not tell you about them, but rest assured that they are there.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Whatsapp is Facebook.
YouTube is Google.

Can we please stop helping the most powerful companies in history gaslight the world about their own control over what we read, see, think, say, and do? Seriously.

I agree and have no love lost for Facebook or Google, but we have bigger fish to fry first. We’re in the middle of a war of totalitarian states vs democracy; they want to collapse or cause chaos to stop democratic freedoms and governments.

Anything that helps that battle in the favor of truth and democracy is a win, even if that help comes from companies like Facebook or Google who have no regard for privacy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CarlJ
But Snopes's article goes into a lot of detail and nuance on that, such as how the actual "inventors" of the Internet feel about him: quite positively, in fact.

So if you want to criticize the "false" rating, yeah, I can see that. But what Snopes did isn't just apply a rating; they provided a ton of context, and once you've read that, you get a pretty good answer on the facts.

Are you actually attempting to defend snopes? You realize it's run by literal bloggers and cat ladies with no subject matter experts on staff or on call, right?


A private company doing something isn't the same as the government doing it. You can regulate companies.

How well has that worked out in practice over the last 40 years? I'd argue it's the corporations that are in charge.


I don't blindly believe the media but I do believe the doctors, scientists and virologists that are interviewed on there.

I certainly don't believe Steve who works in a warehouse, with no qualifications in science and biology, claiming 5g spreads corona virus.

Conspiracy theorists are the biggest idiots you'll ever meet.

Strong words. What of the dozens of medical doctors who got their website taken down because some of their information contradicted the party line? What about the times so-called experts are just dead wrong?

What about the times conspiracy theorists were proven to be correct?

Just because "Steve" couldn't afford a college degree from an Ivy League school, his concerns are irrelevant?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Disagree
  • Like
Reactions: temptee and CarlJ
I agree and have no love lost for Facebook or Google, but we have bigger fish to fry first. We’re in the middle of a war of totalitarian states vs democracy; they want to collapse or cause chaos to stop democratic freedoms and governments.

Anything that helps that battle in the favor of truth and democracy is a win, even if that help comes from companies like Facebook or Google who have no regard for privacy.

Are you really unable to see the inherent contradiction in your post or is that just a troll? Not trying to be mean but that second sentence is basically a word salad of slogans.
 
  • Disagree
  • Like
Reactions: temptee and CarlJ
Private companies have the freedom to do as they please in this regard.

That depends.

Is WhatsApp a public utility? Are they media?

That doesn't negate the fact that the outcomes are still the same if not worse... These companies have massive influence over the average individual in terms of making them think a certain way and making them believe certain things. It's the ultimate outcome that you should be worried or at least think about, not what type of entity is doing the indoctrination.

If a private company can do indoctrination, something went wrong in the antitrust process.

(It did. The WhatsApp acquisition should never have been allowed.)

Oh but yes there are. Perhaps the news sources from which you get your information do not tell you about them, but rest assured that they are there.

Can't wait for groundbreaking information to come out, then.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That depends.

Is WhatsApp a public utility? Are they media?

Are you just arguing against yourself here or am I missing something?

If a private company can do indoctrination, something went wrong in the antitrust process.

(It did. The WhatsApp acquisition should never have been allowed.)

Correct me if I am wrong, but are you insinuating here that you believe that we can not do something now that it is too late?

Can't wait for groundbreaking information to come out, then.
Will probably be a while before your sources of daily news will report on it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Disagree
Reactions: Dwalls90 and CarlJ
Are you actually attempting to defend snopes? You realize it's run by literal bloggers and cat ladies with no subject matter experts on staff or on call, right?

I can't wait to see your version of fact-checking.

How well has that worked out in practice over the last 40 years? I'd argue it's the corporations that are in charge.

Therefore, governments should give up?

Strong words. What of the dozens of medical doctors who got their website taken down because some of their information contradicted the party line?

🤣

Taken down by whom? The "COVID is a liberal hoax but also invented by the Chinese" government? Those fellas?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: mw360 and CarlJ
Are you just arguing against yourself here or am I missing something?

I'm not sure what's complicated about "that depends" as a response to "private companies have the freedom to do as they please in this regard" is complicated, so, yes, you're probably missing something. No, private companies don't have unlimited freedom in this regard.

Correct me if I am wrong, but are you insinuating here that you believe that we can not do something now that it is too late?

OK: you're wrong.

Utterly unfounded, baseless, pointless and non-substantive statement.


Not an argument.

Will probably be a while before your sources of daily news will report on it.

Is that before or after the moon landing studio has been found?
 
  • Like
Reactions: CarlJ
More like getting your personal communication editorialized by some propaganda outfit (the failing and dying Snopes, etc.)
“The failing and dying” - nice touch. Sounds just like someone who can’t say “New York Times“ without putting “the failing” in front of it. As if endlessly repeating that makes it true. Funny how most of that comes from sources that really are propaganda outfits themselves.
 
Strong words. What of the dozens of medical doctors who got their website taken down because some of their information contradicted the party line? What about the times so-called experts are just dead wrong?

What about the times conspiracy theorists were proven to be correct?

Just because "Steve" couldn't afford a college degree from an Ivy League school, his concerns are irrelevant?

I'm not convinced they were doctors. Just a bunch of idiots who bought lab coats off amazon.

Can you name when conspiracy theories were proven to be correct?

And yes his views on things he is not qualified for are irrelevant. Would you trust a furniture salesman to do open heart surgery on you?
 
I don't blindly believe the media but I do believe the doctors, scientists and virologists that are interviewed on there.

I certainly don't believe Steve who works in a warehouse, with no qualifications in science and biology, claiming 5g spreads corona virus.

Conspiracy theorists are the biggest idiots you'll ever meet.
Yep, just one small step below “actively evil” is “aggressively/belligerently clueless”, and there’s far too much of that going around - people who want to ignore science because it disagrees with their beliefs, being led around by the nose by people in power who find the aggressively clueless to be useful: rile them up and tell them what they want to hear, and they’ll argue for you, kill for you, and vote for you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mw360
Yep, just one small step below “actively evil” is “aggressively/belligerently clueless”, and there’s far too much of that going around - people who want to ignore science because it disagrees with their beliefs, being led around by the nose by people in power who find the aggressively clueless to be useful: rile them up and tell them what they want to hear, and they’ll argue for you, kill for you, and vote for you.

I've read this a few times and still cant work out if you're agreeing with me or insulting me.
 
We know that snopes will twist a statement in order to debunk something that wasn't actually claimed and often can't be trusted. All the so-called fact checks need to be fact checked themselves. They will twist what they check to make a point.

For example, to pick something that is quite old and hopefully not contentious, snopes "fact checks" the "Claim: Vice-President Al Gore claimed he ‘invented’ the Internet.” which they say is false, and that is true he never used the word "invented" and never said "I invented the internet". By including "invented" vs "created" snopes can label it false.

The actual statement that Gore said is:
“I’ve traveled to every part of this country during the last six years. During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet.” (CNN transcript of discussion on March 9, 1999’s “Late Edition” with Wolf Blitzer, see http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/03/09/president.2000/transcript.gore/index.html)

Of course ARPANET, the internet precursor, was created in 1969, and Gore started serving in Congress in 1977.

So while snopes may be fact checking something, one has to be extremely careful in exactly what they are fact checking. Clearly Gore was not "creating the internet" since ARPANET was well before his time. Snopes then goes through a lot of verbiage to explain what they are saying, to enable them to label it false.

Anyone who doesn't fact check the fact checkers is asking to be uninformed.


Wow!!! What a seriously well crafted, relevant, logical, incisive, and illustrative example of a comment! Bravo!
 
  • Like
Reactions: temptee
I've read this a few times and still cant work out if you're agreeing with me or insulting me.
Very much agreeing. Sorry, not fully awake yet.

I don’t mind clueless people, they can be educated. But the aggressively clueless are a pox on society, with their conspiracy theories and alternative facts. There was a time when I would have thought a Flat Earth Society was a brilliant thing, with a bunch of smart people trying to keep a straight face while putting on a show of being outraged by this heretical “spherical earth” idea, but now there’s a bunch of actual idiots out there who really seriously believe this crap. Who want to believe the lies and shout down the scientists, doctors, epidemiologists and such.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Seanm87
Conspiracy theorists are the biggest idiots you'll ever meet.


Yeah, like the idiots that were talking about Epstein Island being a thing for over a decade.

There are some ridiculous "conspiracy" theories out there, but those don't discredit the ones that have been shown to be true despite the suppression by the media and other powerful entities.
 
  • Like
Reactions: giv-as-a-ciggy-kent
Point of clarification. Approved conspiracy theories are good. Unapproved conspiracy theories are bad. If you're not sure about whether a particular conspiracy theory is okay, see if big media and big tech are promoting it or suppressing it, and take your cues from them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: giv-as-a-ciggy-kent
I'm not convinced they were doctors. Just a bunch of idiots who bought lab coats off amazon.
Possibly, but the way in which it was handled really should raise questions. Ability to censor does not imply correctness.


Can you name when conspiracy theories were proven to be correct?
Paperclip
Monarch
Sunshine

And yes his views on things he is not qualified for are irrelevant. Would you trust a furniture salesman to do open heart surgery on you?
No I don't of course. But you don't just dismiss claims because recognized authorities tell you to. Maybe ya boi Steve in the warehouse is very well read on the topic. What is college if not a structured way to obtain knowledge? What if you are capable of obtaining knowledge on your own terms. Is that knowledge invalid because some diploma wasn't issued? Is it possible that the diploma mill may have ties to political parties, corporations or other interests and that those ties may influence the teaching at said colleges?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Fact checking seems good,, but the question them remains,, the idea to give people the option to fact check with online resources,,, will people go for that in this world we call 'convenience'

It's not gonna be very convient if people have to look to pair info up... it may help in a pinch.
 
Fact checking seems good,, but the question them remains,, the idea to give people the option to fact check with online resources,,, will people go for that in this world we call 'convenience'

It's not gonna be very convient if people have to look to pair info up... it may help in a pinch.
Here's the thing. People can already google stuff themselves if they wanted to, but they didn't.
Since this is user initiated, I doubt people who are already susceptible to spreading hoaxes would be bothered making the effort to "fact check."

Plus, many hoaxes, at least in my country, are spread as actual messages with misleading/fake videos/photos. They're not even links to sites.
 
Here's the thing. People can already google stuff themselves if they wanted to, but they didn't.
Since this is user initiated, I doubt people who are already susceptible to spreading hoaxes would be bothered making the effort to "fact check."

Plus, many hoaxes, at least in my country, are spread as actual messages with misleading/fake videos/photos. They're not even links to sites.

I believe I t doesn’t matter if it’s a link. I believe it’s any message that’s flagged as forwarded multiple times. Whatsapp can’t read the messages, so they cannot know the content.
If the algorithm finds its a message forwarded multiple times, then it adds a magnifying glass which sends the contents to the web, (presumably with tags) to search various factors checking websites.

I would assume this has tags with the search because, as it’s mentioned, it automatically brings up the results from various fact checking sites, rather than straight googling.
Straight googling (if you use google) would likely bring up answers consistent with what you may already google if you do nothing to stop a profile being created- the so called echo chamber. This should assist a great many ‘normal’ people from seeing information in a different light so as to help them form an opinion outside of just hearsay.
 
The actual statement that Gore said is:
...

Your grasping at semantics would carry much, much more water if actual "fathers of the internet" like Robert Kahn and Vinton Cerf didn't write in defense of Al Gore, as reported by Snopes: http://amsterdam.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0009/msg00311.html

So, thank you for linking to that article. I always wondered about that particular pet peeve of some people regarding Al Gore, now I know what kind of reasoning is there (or not).

As for me, if it's good enough for Cerf, it certainly is good enough for me.

(now, to wait with abated breath for someone to complain that no one literally "fathered" the internet...)
 
  • Love
Reactions: CarlJ
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.