Read on Twitter
1. Facebook is lying about its fact-checking program and its approach to climate disinformation.
This gets a bit into the weeds but its worth it because Facebook is trying to use the complexity to obscure its actions, which are indefensible.
Let's review.
This gets a bit into the weeds but its worth it because Facebook is trying to use the complexity to obscure its actions, which are indefensible.
Let's review.
2. First some background. Last month, @emorwee and I wrote an article about how Facebook overruled a fact-check by one of Facebook's independent fact-checkers, Science Feedback.
5 PhD climate scientists found a column in the Washington Examiner was false https://popular.info/p/facebook-creates-fact-checking-exemption
5 PhD climate scientists found a column in the Washington Examiner was false https://popular.info/p/facebook-creates-fact-checking-exemption
3. Facebook quietly overruled Science Feedback, finding that the column - which falsely claimed certain climate models were inaccurate - was opinion.
As we reported at the time, this is not how Facebook's fact-checking program is supposed to work https://popular.info/p/facebook-creates-fact-checking-exemption
As we reported at the time, this is not how Facebook's fact-checking program is supposed to work https://popular.info/p/facebook-creates-fact-checking-exemption
4. Today, in the NYT, Facebook says that "all opinion content on the platform... is exempt from fact-checking" and "this policy has been in place since 2016"
THIS IS ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/14/climate/climate-facebook-fact-checking.html
THIS IS ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/14/climate/climate-facebook-fact-checking.html
5. Not only has it not been the policy since 2016, it's not the policy now.
Facebook's policy does not say that opinion pieces are "exempt" from fact-checking
It says that fact-checkers can DECIDE to label a piece opinion
There is a BIG DIFFERENCE
Facebook's policy does not say that opinion pieces are "exempt" from fact-checking
It says that fact-checkers can DECIDE to label a piece opinion
There is a BIG DIFFERENCE
6. Facebook's rules exempt posts from politicians from fact-checking.
It does not exempt opinion.
It does not exempt opinion.
7. Facebook now says that "[d]eciding what’s opinion is at the discretion of Facebook, not the fact checkers."
This contradicted by Facebook's written policies.
If its up to Facebook, why is "opinion" a category available to fact-checkers to select?
It's incoherent.
This contradicted by Facebook's written policies.
If its up to Facebook, why is "opinion" a category available to fact-checkers to select?
It's incoherent.
8. In fact, Facebook's policy says if you publish something and you disagree with the decision of a fact-checker YOU HAVE TO APPEAL TO THE FACT-CHECKER, NOT FACEBOOK
Here, some climate science deniers were upset with the ruling of Science Feedback, and appealed to Facebook
Here, some climate science deniers were upset with the ruling of Science Feedback, and appealed to Facebook
9. Facebook intervened on behalf of the climate science deniers and reversed the fact-checkers' ruling and are now trying to claim this is the way it has worked all along.
This is absolutely false.
It's not the way it is supposed to work, according to Facebook's own policy
This is absolutely false.
It's not the way it is supposed to work, according to Facebook's own policy
10. Here's a simple question Facebook will not answer: WHO AT FACEBOOK IS MAKING THE DECISION TO OVERRULE FACTCHECKERS?
Who decided that this technical analysis of climate models was "opinion"
There are no answers and no transparency
Who decided that this technical analysis of climate models was "opinion"
There are no answers and no transparency
11. The climate science deniers who got the ruling reversed told E&E News that they got help from a "conservative" Facebook employee
12. If opinion content is now exempt and a mysterious group of Facebook staff can now overrule any fact-checker by claiming any piece of content is "opinion" the entire fact-checking program is a joke
No reputable organization should be involved
No reputable organization should be involved
13. Facebook told the NYT that misinformation about climate change can be an "opinion" because climate misinformation is not "an immediate threat to human health and safety."
Is this seriously Facebook's policy?
Is this seriously Facebook's policy?
14. Anyway, I've asked Facebook a number of questions about this and will let you know if I hear back
15. In the past, I have not gotten meaningful answers from Facebook. If you work at Facebook and have information about what is going on, please contact me at jlegum@protonmail.com
16. One last thing. Today, Facebook said its policy since 2016 has been to exempt opinion pieces from fact-checking
In September 2019, Facebook told the WSJ it was considering a NEW POLICY to exempt opinion piece from fact-checking
It was never announced https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-to-create-fact-checking-exemptions-for-opinion-and-satire-11569875314
In September 2019, Facebook told the WSJ it was considering a NEW POLICY to exempt opinion piece from fact-checking
It was never announced https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-to-create-fact-checking-exemptions-for-opinion-and-satire-11569875314
