sure it is. no one has agreed on definition of "fake." Many ppl's lists contain partisan, advocacy, and misleading sites--not fake.
-
-
Replying to @trevortimm
I don't think lists are the way to go. I'm wary of them. Though, if you cannot agree that there is no "Denver Guardian" or that+
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @zeynep
glad we agree a lot of people have different definitions of "fake" and that would be problematic!
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @trevortimm
Actually, I think there is a lot of common ground on "fake"—you have no society without it—I just don't think lists will work.
4 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @zeynep
you've written so much great stuff on the problems with algorithms. It's weird you think they'll solve this complex problem here
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @trevortimm
Not solve, but improve. Nobody is censoring anything. They already have rules. They should have much better rules.
3 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @trevortimm
I'd be for nixing the fraudulent stuff from ad and feed network—to stop everyone else competing with them—but that's tiny group.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @zeynep @trevortimm
Such cases are few, though—Denver Guardian type stuff. If we literally cannot agree that's fraud, I think there's no hope.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @zeynep @trevortimm
But the crux of the issue is to improve the financial and attention incentives they already have set up via algorithm & policy.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @zeynep
if you'd like to debate this via email and publish it somewhere, I'd love to, since I think it's an important discussion to have
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Agree; sometime soon. I'd like to stay away from the censorship via list frame—too 20th century. Won't really work anyway. :-D
-
-
Replying to @zeynep
sure, you can start and frame it any way you'd like. but it's a good example of why people already can't agree on a def. of "fake"
2 replies 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @trevortimm
Facebook happily bans or limits porn and spam on its site, though people cannot agree on those either. Many such examples.
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.