Meta eliminates third-party fact checking program, moves to 'Community Notes' model

Let's take politics out of it for a second. Even without politics involved, this was eventually going to happen anyway.

People don't like being challenged. That's really what it boils down to.

The internet was supposed to bring unbiased information to the masses and usher in a new age of knowledge and communication. The problem was that instead of seeking out unbiased information, people started seeking out echo chambers. People didn't want unbiased information. They want to be told what they want to hear.

People don't want to engage in social media where they end up arguing with those who disagree with them. They prefer to instead spend that time having discussions with like-minded people. Those discussions are often more civil and more relaxing, but come with the tradeoff of shutting out new, dissenting information that may change or at least challenge your point of view. The problem is that most people don't want that. They don't want to be challenged. They want to be told they're right. So to them, not getting new information that would challenge their worldview isn't a bug. It's a feature.

The problem is that it creates an endless feedback loop. A bunch of people get together in their echo chamber of choice, and their discussions often devolve into little more than circlejerks. They get that dopamine rush of constantly being told they're right from their peers on social media. So when somebody comes in and challenges the status quo, that interferes with the dopamine rush. This angers the people in the echo chamber who will do whatever they can to remove the dissenter. Subreddit/community rules. Downvotes to oblivion. Being ridiculed by regulars. Or just being told outright that their opinions are not welcomed, facts be damned. r/conservative on Reddit is probably one of the better examples I can think of, as they openly state in their sidebar that the sub is an echo chamber, dissenting opinions are not welcomed or allowed, and that they acknowledge and want it this way. And there are plenty of other communities who gladly make the same admission, regardless of subject matter or political leanings.

If you need proof, go to virtually any social media community. Post something that goes against the hivemind. Be objective and fact-based. Cite your sources. And stand by your position. And watch how quickly you get downvoted into oblivion and basically told to go fuck off. Watch how quickly your unbiased, factually correct posts get downvoted while the 3 word rebuttal of "Fuck off, idiot" gets gilded and upvoted to the moon. It happens here. It happens on Reddit. It happens on literally every single social media site I have been on since the dawn of the internet. Doesn't matter the topic. Sports. Religion. Politics. People want to believe they're right. And in a world where it is piss-easy to find communities of people willing to tell you how right you are no matter what position you take, someone coming by and challenging that becomes as offensive as a racial slur. Every single "community vote" system I have ever seen, regardless of the rules set forth on how it is supposed to be used, almost instantly devolves into a glorified "I agree/I disagree" button, where votes are not given based on the quality and relevance of the content, but based on the popularity of the poster and how much the content reinforces the community's accepted worldview, with dissenters basically being run out of town.

Zuckberg is certainly making this decision for multiple other reasons (including his own financial gain), but his decision still is reflecting the direction our society is going as a whole. People just want to be able to say and do what they want without being challenged. I'm not saying it's the right thing by any stretch. I'm just saying that's the direction our society is heading. People want all of the freedoms to say what they want, but none of the consequences that come with saying it. They want to voice their opinions, not have them challenged. And they consider it "unfair" if you're not doing the exact same thing to "the other side", even if "the other side" has done nothing to warrant it. If their nonsense is being fact-checked after every sentence and yours isn't (because you're stating facts in the first place), then it's not because they're wrong, but it's because you're biased.

This is where we are as a society. Feels over facts. Perception over reality. And the problem is that a sizeable portion of our population acknowledges this and has repeatedly said "Yes, we know, and we want it this way."

16 comments

It's probably much cheaper to let your users do it for free.
- And it's easier to place your thumb on the scales.
- Often funnier too, based on shit I've seen on twitter
  
  r/GetNoted flashbacks
Suspiciously timed to allow Orange Hitler and the cult to spread more bullshit and hateful lies as the inauguration looms
- Hugest crowd size.
Is the solution to this problem to just start flooding these networks with false propaganda like posts from the left to mirror what the right has been doing for so long? With only one side acting this way it drags the Overton window invariably right and destroys any desire from anyone one the right to support unbiased factually correct information. I honestly don’t know a truly virtuous solution to the problem when a party has embraced victory by any means.
- You can't win the medium that is owned by the opposition. Bottom line is they will enforce their rules (and make new ones) against any successful leftist strategy on the platform. And conveniently ignores those same rules in regards to the right.
- The solution is to stop using Facebook.
  And don't give me the "BuT mArKeTpLaCe!" Excuse. Craigslist is still a thing.
  
  Craigslist doesn't hold a candle to Marketplace. I go straight there, see zero ads, have no idea what the main page looks like.
- another issue is they have a much larger amount of the not working and not needing to look for work segment of the population.
Let's take politics out of it for a second. Even without politics involved, this was eventually going to happen anyway.
People don't like being challenged. That's really what it boils down to.
The internet was supposed to bring unbiased information to the masses and usher in a new age of knowledge and communication. The problem was that instead of seeking out unbiased information, people started seeking out echo chambers. People didn't want unbiased information. They want to be told what they want to hear.
People don't want to engage in social media where they end up arguing with those who disagree with them. They prefer to instead spend that time having discussions with like-minded people. Those discussions are often more civil and more relaxing, but come with the tradeoff of shutting out new, dissenting information that may change or at least challenge your point of view. The problem is that most people don't want that. They don't want to be challenged. They want to be told they're right. So to them, not getting new information that would challenge their worldview isn't a bug. It's a feature.
The problem is that it creates an endless feedback loop. A bunch of people get together in their echo chamber of choice, and their discussions often devolve into little more than circlejerks. They get that dopamine rush of constantly being told they're right from their peers on social media. So when somebody comes in and challenges the status quo, that interferes with the dopamine rush. This angers the people in the echo chamber who will do whatever they can to remove the dissenter. Subreddit/community rules. Downvotes to oblivion. Being ridiculed by regulars. Or just being told outright that their opinions are not welcomed, facts be damned. r/conservative on Reddit is probably one of the better examples I can think of, as they openly state in their sidebar that the sub is an echo chamber, dissenting opinions are not welcomed or allowed, and that they acknowledge and want it this way. And there are plenty of other communities who gladly make the same admission, regardless of subject matter or political leanings.
If you need proof, go to virtually any social media community. Post something that goes against the hivemind. Be objective and fact-based. Cite your sources. And stand by your position. And watch how quickly you get downvoted into oblivion and basically told to go fuck off. Watch how quickly your unbiased, factually correct posts get downvoted while the 3 word rebuttal of "Fuck off, idiot" gets gilded and upvoted to the moon. It happens here. It happens on Reddit. It happens on literally every single social media site I have been on since the dawn of the internet. Doesn't matter the topic. Sports. Religion. Politics. People want to believe they're right. And in a world where it is piss-easy to find communities of people willing to tell you how right you are no matter what position you take, someone coming by and challenging that becomes as offensive as a racial slur. Every single "community vote" system I have ever seen, regardless of the rules set forth on how it is supposed to be used, almost instantly devolves into a glorified "I agree/I disagree" button, where votes are not given based on the quality and relevance of the content, but based on the popularity of the poster and how much the content reinforces the community's accepted worldview, with dissenters basically being run out of town.
Zuckberg is certainly making this decision for multiple other reasons (including his own financial gain), but his decision still is reflecting the direction our society is going as a whole. People just want to be able to say and do what they want without being challenged. I'm not saying it's the right thing by any stretch. I'm just saying that's the direction our society is heading. People want all of the freedoms to say what they want, but none of the consequences that come with saying it. They want to voice their opinions, not have them challenged. And they consider it "unfair" if you're not doing the exact same thing to "the other side", even if "the other side" has done nothing to warrant it. If their nonsense is being fact-checked after every sentence and yours isn't (because you're stating facts in the first place), then it's not because they're wrong, but it's because you're biased.
This is where we are as a society. Feels over facts. Perception over reality. And the problem is that a sizeable portion of our population acknowledges this and has repeatedly said "Yes, we know, and we want it this way."
Copying most of my comment from the c/news post because this is super important to know.
They aren't just getting rid of fact checkers, they are also allowing “allegations of mental illness or abnormality when based on gender or sexual orientation, given political and religious discourse about transgenderism and homosexuality and common non-serious usage of words like ‘weird.’” They are saying it is completely okay to call trans or gay people mentally ill because their existence is "political".
This article doesn't even fucking mention that. It only says they're changing some rules about "gender" but not what those rules are or what those changes mean.
This is insane.
I'm fine with this. Old folks hated fact checks before now it'll be personal between everyone LOL