Home / Be The Change / Zuckerberg Just Revealed Facebook’s 7-Point Plan to Censor “Fake News” and It’s Chilling

Zuckerberg Just Revealed Facebook’s 7-Point Plan to Censor “Fake News” and It’s Chilling

Until corporate media and the neoliberal establishment refused to acknowledge their direct role in the election of Donald Trump and threw a temper-tantrum about misinformation on social media to scapegoat blame, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg balked at the notion faulty reports circulating on social media had anything at all to do with the November 8th shocker.

“Of all the content on Facebook, more than 99 percent of what people see is authentic. Only a very small amount is fake news and hoaxes,” Zuckerberg wrote in a post to his platform last Saturday. “The hoaxes that do exist are not limited to one partisan view, or even to politics. Overall, this makes it extremely unlikely hoaxes changed the outcome of this election in one direction or the other.”

Now, rather than stand by that original assertion, Zuckerberg instead cast all logic aside and unleashed a Machiavellian seven-point plan to eradicate the “very small amount” of false information — read: all opinion not in lock step with the establishment narrative — from the newsfeeds of Facebook’s billion-plus users.

Because, apparently, we can’t be trusted to think for ourselves.

“The bottom line is: we take misinformation seriously,” Zuckerberg wrote late Friday evening, apparently forgetting what he posted exactly one week ago. “Our goal is to connect people with the stories they find most meaningful, and we know people want accurate information. We’ve been working on this problem for a long time and we take this responsibility seriously. We’ve made significant progress, but there is more work to be done.”

Curiously, the head of the Facebook Ministry of Truth neglected to explain how the 65 corporate presstitutes and myriad mendacious mainstream outlets exposed in Wikileaks’ Podesta Files for colluding with the Clintonite establishment were awarded a free pass to spread propagandic disinformation — and, frequently, flagrant lies.

Worse, what Zuckerberg wrote next should send chills down the spines of anyone who has ever been forced to deal with fallout from the social media platform’s already-rampant and oft-inexplicable censorship via erroneous and revenge reporting on posts, arbitrary unpublishing of pages, ghosting, and newsfeed suppression — as well as those who look to Facebook for alternatives to vapid mainstream media:

“Historically, we have relied on our community to help us understand what is fake and what is not. Anyone on Facebook can report any link as false, and we use signals from those reports along with a number of others — like people sharing links to myth-busting sites such as Snopes — to understand which stories we can confidently classify as misinformation. Similar to clickbait, spam and scams, we penalize this content in News Feed so it’s much less likely to spread.”

Snopes? Really? The same Snopes that took it upon itself to “debunk” an inside joke in meme form that happened to go viral?

In just those three sentences, Zuckerberg does more to expose the innate perils of censorship than any scholarly tome on the subject ever could — personal opinion always operates the censor’s heavy hand. It’s inescapable fact that what one individual deems devoid of value, another may find sacrilegiously offensive — while another may laugh off as innocuous.

Dismissing that scripture — or, perhaps, forgetting it formed the foundation for First Amendment protections of free speech, press, and expression — Zuckerberg laid out his plan to combat the ‘relatively small percentage of misinformation,’ encompassing the following points:

  1. Stronger detection. The most important thing we can do is improve our ability to classify misinformation. This means better technical systems to detect what people will flag as false before they do it themselves.
  1. Easy reporting. Making it much easier for people to report stories as fake will help us catch more misinformation faster.
  1. Third party verification. There are many respected fact checking organizations and, while we have reached out to some, we plan to learn from many more.
  1. Warnings. We are exploring labeling stories that have been flagged as false by third parties or our community, and showing warnings when people read or share them.
  1. Related articles quality. We are raising the bar for stories that appear in related articles under links in News Feed.
  1. Disrupting fake news economics. A lot of misinformation is driven by financially motivated spam. We’re looking into disrupting the economics with ads policies like the one we announced earlier this week, and better ad farm detection.
  1. Listening. We will continue to work with journalists and others in the news industry to get their input, in particular, to better understand their fact checking systems and learn from them.

In other words, apart from spam detection, which other websites and platforms have effectively combatted for years, Facebook’s plan to ‘detect’ misinformation will be based on what any idiot says. Although the people of this planet generally operate from a place of honesty and integrity, let’s face it, humans have nasty penchants for retribution, revenge, sanctimonious arrogance, self-righteousness, misjudgment, mischaracterization, hyperbole, and — most imperatively — making mistakes.

Relying on people’s personal assessments of possibly-false news items as the primary driver of what deserves to be branded with a Scarlet Letter “F” is a system destined to fail everyone before it even begins.

Facebook still does not provide the means to rebut post and link removals or the sudden unpublishing of pages — the platform has, in essence, a shoot first, ask questions later attitude when it receives a report something violated its Community Standards. This has already imperiled owners of perfectly legitimate pages with millions of fans to the arduous process of challenging unjustified reports and coping in the meantime with devastating loss of revenue.

Nowhere in Friday’s announcement does Zuckerberg address those concerns — which will exponentially increase if and when the plan begins. With little to no recourse to defend against what will undoubtedly be an explosion of posts erroneously flagged as ‘false information,’ Facebook is brazenly handing over the censor’s black marker to a populace already too lackadaisical to bother investigating questionable news items.

Therein lies the greatest threat to a free press and free speech this country has seen since Red Scare McCarthyism — Facebook, backed by a polarized public, will be the arbiter of acceptable thought — and those who dare question or criticize that thought will pay with their livelihoods.

Far worse, everyone will pay the price of lost access to information. We’re already starting to.

Responses to Zuckerberg’s announcement post seemed largely ambivalent, and many took the opportunity to question the validity of the authoritarian plan.

“Please just be a neutral platform that display original voice from people as long as the content are not illegal. Do not try to treat your users are idiots and need somebody to tell them what is right what’s wrong. Fake or non-fake, people will figure it out. It’s dangerous such decision or filtering will be done by your company or any other power. This will be called censorship if it happens in China or Russia,” user Chen Li implored.

Others chided the head of Facebook for the disingenuous failure to apply the same standards to the mendacious corporate media.

“Mark, will you also fight government sponsored propaganda of the United States?” asked user Jiri Klouda. “What about articles where unnamed government officials intentionally share false information with journalists, often with grave consequences. Like for example in the lead up to the Iraq war, or many other wars. We’d like to know that if you are going to fight against disinformation that it will be applied evenly and not just in one sided way as the mass market US media companies do.”

Some noted how the platform’s censorship and arbitrary suppression already irreparably harms honest businesspeople.

“You advertised Facebook as a great place for businesses to have pages, small businesses did well, like mine did. My 783k page that took years to build was unpublished, thousands of people have had their pages removed without reason, businesses are suffering, you are taking food off the table, heat from people’s homes and kids presents away from under the tree. The Sad thing is you don’t seem to care; you won’t listen to us. I hope you have a great Christmas Mark Zuckerberg because lots of people won’t be able to because of you,” wrote Laura Holmes.

Facebook’s plan might, indeed, rid the platform of misinformation — but, to be sure, it will also rid the platform of dissenting voices, the debate of controversial topics, editorial opinions provoking new thought, and alternative news outlets whose integrity proved the corporate media worthless.

This plan will, in short, rid Facebook of the truth — that beautiful diversity of thought we once celebrated, rather than snuffed.

  • Di

    Fake news is the msm telling the people that wmd were in Iraq knowing there was not costing thousands of lives.
    Telling the public sanders supporters were violent and throwing chairs in nevada and there were no chairs thrown

    • David Schultz

      Zuckerberg is using “fake news” as excuse to for censorship. All of main stream media is fake but nobody seams to care that much.

      • Terry Licia

        They read it, internalize it and accept it as truth … they’re dumbed down, and don’t even realize it. I’m not sure which I find more disgusting … ignorant Americans who only think they are great, or intelligent Americans who allow the dummies to get away with their ignorance! Call them ALL on the lies and half-truths! Land of the free, home of the brave … ha! Land of the idiots, liars and a First Lady who is no lady! And we have our youth in wars dying for … THIS??

  • Concerned Citizen

    As a retired neuroscientist, I grow more and more convinced that all we have are opinions: facts simply don’t exist. As a function of sheer utility, opinions (or hypotheses) that prove correct over and over again, are largely taken as fact. Facts simply are hypotheses yet to be disproved–a “consensus of opinion” might be an apt synonym. As an example: the “world being flat” was considered factual until it was discovered (more or less by accident) that it’s round (or close to it). Is that the final fact? Perhaps not, because in one’s imagination–not saying it’s true–but it could be that… the earth subtly changes shape over time and we haven’t yet developed the measuring tools to capture that “reality.” Is reality a fact? Perhaps, but like we saw in the movie “The Matrix” reality is a relatively boring, complex data set. Our mind’s ability to perceive fundamental patterns in that complex data set–enable us to fly fast and furiously from that was impossible to succinctly capture–to something pithy that we can instantaneously grasp. So Mark Zuckerberg needs to be careful when sorting fact from fiction. He needs to know for sure if either or both even exist.

    • Mike Lynch

      You might be on to something. Quantum physics research indicates that reality may not be as black and white but dependent on the observer.

      • jandr0

        Sigh. Oh, goodness gracious me. Yet another person who wants to take 1930’s physics and inappropriately shoehorn it into the social “sciences.”

        I ask myself, will it ever stop….

      • Dorian Gamble

        How does quantum physics affect our everyday living in the world of Newtonian physics ? If there is a cat in you answer I’m going to scream…

  • Arie Nieuwenhuizen

    Fuck facebook, if no one is typing he got no more money!

  • Michael Saenz

    Another Zionist power grab. It doesn’t surprise me.

    • TecumsehUnfaced

      Yep! He’s a Zionist. He’s an enemy agent and has no legitimate business running a service like Facebook.

      • Terry Licia

        But you do not have to use it! It’s privately owned and operated. You do have a choice of using other online social media. Do it! Why does it matter what the owner of this company is or is not? He’s not hurting you. You are not hurting him, by any means. LEAVE! You can! It’s so easy, too! Just close your account, and go somewhere else! BTW, what does Zionism have to do with anything??

        • TecumsehUnfaced

          I don’t have a Facebook account. I knew from the start that it was set up for spying and control.

          Zionists are always being used as spies by the Zionist thugdom. Zionism requires severe bigotry, a total lack of conscience, a willingness to do genocidal country stealing and floods of atrocities like these:

          Over 750,000 people (~80%) driven off their ancestral lands

          Over 500 Arab villages and towns BULLDOZED

          Drove attacks on over 700,000 Arab Jews to drive them into conquered Palestine

          • Terry Licia

            Zionists??? Then the NSA is a Zionist operation, too? Because everything, and I do mean, EVERYTHING said online, now and yesterday and the decade before, is fully known by the NSA and is stored in Utah! Gee, just ask Snowden! Or is he a Zionist, too?

          • TecumsehUnfaced

            You’re going to mock me like a silly girl?

            Didn’t a Zionist agent steal U.S. nuclear weapons material in in Pittsburgh?

            Didn’t LBJ give the Zionists the satellite data they needed to start the ’67 war with a surprise attack destroying the Egyptian air force?

            Doesn’t American intelligence share everything with Mossad?

            You sound like someone desperate to keep even a broken cover up going… and also some one not to be trusted. That disaspora* you’re pushing sounds like another scam out of the utterly unprincipled Zionist thugdom throttling Palestine.

            You may continue mocking me, if you want. It wasn’t very bright of you blowing your cover when you had a diaspora* to peddle.

      • Terry Licia

        He CREATED it, so tell me why doesn’t he have the right to run it? It IS his business! Good grief. Listen to yourself! Where on earth are you from??

        • Chris Peterson

          Isn’t it a publicly traded company? Therefore, technically, he owns a piece of it, as do millions of other people who own stock in it or have mutual funds or other investments that hold stock in it. Also whether he CREATED it or not is subject to debate, but he certainly wasn’t the sole creator of it. Just sayin

    • Dorian Gamble

      As in he supports the Jewish homeland in Israel? Are we being anti-Semitic here or just stupid? Isn’t Rupert Murdoch Jewish or does it only matter when they support you own philosophies ? There’s a conspiracy chat room that’s really missing you right now.

      • TecumsehUnfaced

        “Israel” is nothing but a myth concocted by ancient control freaks. Today’s “Israel” is nothing but a thugdom ripped from the entrails of the genuinely Semite indigenous people of Palestine, by a gang of thugs of European Ashkenazi converts to Judaism that never lived in Palestine until they invaded it.

        • Terry Licia

          Have you ever been there?

  • Cassidy Pagan

    It’s not up to Zuckerberg to verify if its true or not, it’s up to the average person to stop being a fat lazy piece of shit, and not share something without knowledge if it’s true or not. All this is doing is making it seem like you don’t have to do any further research, because someone else will do it for you. Be you own perso people!

  • frenchie mama


  • Jan Bammel

    And just how long is it going to take for them to ascertain whether a story is true or not.

  • Raul

    So the wolf will be guarding the hen house.lol

  • Hugo Spinoso

    the first two can be exploited, so it seems more like guidance. if you add 4 and 5 to this it can go both ways, number 3 is sort of easy to do as if it interest you even more you could look for it.

    the problem is it can create a guiding box, gradually profiling a person, that doesnt matter if its just news (a did b ), the problem is as to why? and what might happend? all this in turn will make the problem of fake new even worst, as it might create a plausible deniability effect, while the reality remains, even worst as it can be done individualy, so this has the potential of being the next step of mass propaganda.

  • torino390


  • goingnowherefast

    If Zuckerberg goes through with this, I’ll cancel my account. I hope millions of others do the same. Make the idiot go broke.

    • Terry Licia

      Well, it will certainly seem like a breathe of fresh air when you dummies leave, too! 🙂

      • TecumsehUnfaced

        So you’re also a Zuckerberg agent, working to make us submit to spying and control.

        • Terry Licia

          Well, if I were, all I can say is … he sure pays nuttin, honey!

          • TecumsehUnfaced

            Now she calls me, “honey”! Just after she blew her cover. Most people playing the Zionist Con Game do it better.

    • Kronsteen

      Never, ever use Facebook.

    • chris

      He absolutely is going through with this. And lest we forget, he STOLE the idea for Facebook and had to pay 500 million to the identical twins Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss and their dorm-mate Divya Narendra! He was HIRED to write it – as a software developer and one who HAS hired developers to write software, I can assure that what he did brings wrong to new levels.

  • Did y’all miss Trump, when asked about a false factoid he cited, well I read it on the internet. Yes, lots of people can’t think for themselves. The level of disinformation and propaganda is out of control. Blame much of the media….they fill their time betweem commercials by bringing these partisan ‘surrogates’ firing chaff into the air to confuse people. The fast-moving internet has changed the situation and the propagandists have trashed traditional media, saying that those who DO research and validate their stories are “MSM”, not to be believed. They’re generally the ones billing themselves as ‘fair and balanced’ when in fact, they are everything BUT! Aren’t we glad they aren’t printing twenty dollar bills, too! Course if we shut down the Treasury Dept, then we wouldn’t even be able to trust our money at the grocery store!

    • Dorian Gamble

      The voice of reason in a storm of constant indignation – thank you for that. Real journalism is being replaced by the ignorant rantings of partisan hacks and somehow people believe the two should be given equal treatment and consideration.

      • well written!

        • Terry Licia

          I’ve not found a single disagreeable comment written by Dorian Gamble. I must confess though, I was speed-reading at first, and thought he’d chosen a username of Dorian Gray. For a bit there, the dissonance was a real head-shaker!

  • john vieira

    Now somebody MUST be able to come up with an alternative to Facebook…The new openness in the Russian Federation a possibility as American ‘freedom’ diminishes. Some years ago Britain might have stepped in but they have already ‘decamped’…forget China…but maybe India??? They start ‘censorship’ of any kind here…dump them-FAST.

    • Dorian Gamble

      Russia is well-known for restricting open journalism – even imprisoning (or murdering) reporters who write stories that are critical of Putin. Freedom of speech does not apply to a social forum in FB. You seem to have some interesting ideas about what constitutes “freedom”.

      • john vieira

        Do you really think any of them would give a damn what you say…they might block out the locals, that’s their problem. So ‘social’ forums are to be ‘closed’…Voltaire would vomit!!!

  • JoeCushing

    There is something worse happening. Today, I shared a post from George W Obama’s page calling out the “anti-war” democrats for not protesting during the Obama terms. Immediately upon sharing it, my facebook was logged off. When I logged back in, I was put on restriction from posting articles for 24 hours–any articles. That means I cannot share this article.

    Why what is happening is powerful and so important:

    If I’m unable to post links for 24 hours; that goes a long way to silencing a thread of thought. I’m a person who is going to share links to stories condemning the state and politics. I share truth. By letting that one post through, and 500 + people shared it, there are probably a few thousand anti-government posts that didn’t happen. All 500 + of us are restricted.
    You have to understand that propaganda is a mathematical construct. By shutting us down it reduces the number of impressions our messages get. This has the impact of changing minds…or preventing us from changing minds.

    It’s a serious undermining to the spread of information that the state worshipers, at Facebook, don’t like. It is a lead filled boot on the scale of thought.

  • Stephen King

    Everyone needs to stop using Facebook and start migrating over to http://steemit.com where you get paid to post and the information is not censored.

  • Yngve N Bjørndal

    So you will get help from mass media ???
    Hope someone with the possibilitys can make a new versjon og FB
    we need a Fakebook. We the people , You mister fuckerberg are bought by the Devils,
    So you are part of the brainwashing machine, We all know by now , that mass media are the fake news.

  • I think this post gets this wrong:

    “Facebook’s plan might, indeed, rid the platform of misinformation — but, to be sure, it will also rid the platform of dissenting voices, the debate of controversial topics, editorial opinions provoking new thought, and alternative news outlets whose integrity proved the corporate media worthless.”

    Your blogs, your opinions and your editorials are not in danger of censorship. The company is only looking to separate this kind of content from journalism.

    Journalism is subject to a set of ethics that other content doesn’t have to adhere to (see: http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp). So doesn’t it make sense to create a distinction between news reports and our opinions?

    As far as concerns about censoring independent media, there are lots of quality independent media organizations that break stories that MSM doesn’t pay attention to and they will NOT be affected by Facebook’s new policy:

    – Mother Jones
    -The Intercept

    …and so on. I agree that we should all keep an eye on Facebook, but I also agree with their decision to help users distinguish between verified news reports and unverified content.

    • JoeCushing

      See my post above and think again. What happened to me today was clearly censorship of dissenting opinion.

    • TecumsehUnfaced

      Mother Jones went wh0re a long time ago.

    • jandr0

      [….but I also agree with their decision to help users distinguish between verified news reports and unverified content.]


      Please take your confused bleeding-heart paternalism and keep it, before you go all autocratic on the rest of us.

  • Dean Scarpinato

    Freedom of the Press is the first Amendment. If the MSM wants to keep their audience they should stop lying and manipulating and destroying peoples character. If FB wants to keep its monopoly it should remain a free and open forum. Don’t think we cannot engineer around your platform. You’d be making the same mistake that CNN made.

    • DeadMessenger

      And dying the same death that Twitter is now, I might add.

    • Dorian Gamble

      Freedom of the press does not apply to a private social media company, nor are many of the stories spread there part of MSM. People who think all speech should be treated equally, (regardless of their authenticity, sources or education on a subject) are fooling themselves and don’t know how to distinguish truth from fiction.

      • Dean Scarpinato

        But I’m sure you’re cool with forcing a private bakery to bake a gerbil cake for you and your same sex partner.

        • Dorian Gamble

          I’m glad you feel emboldened to spread your anti-gay sentiment, Dean. It really shows the strength of your character.
          Since you are clearly ignorant on the laws governing the First Amendment in this country –
          discriminating against people based on their sexual identity is not protected free speech and the courts have repeatedly ruled in support of this.
          Anything else you want to say about homosexuals tough guy?

          • D Lll

            If I wanted to put Sieg Heil on a cake because I really believed Hitler was right should a bakery owner be forced to make that cake for me?

            The first Amendment gives us the right to freedom of association. If I do not want to associate or do business with you because of you religious beliefs, sexual preference, race, age, color, smell, height, etc, etc then i do not have to. No one should be able to force me to do it. If a bakery doesn’t make that cake for a gay couple that is their right. The government has no right telling them who they should or should not do business with. That bakery owner may find himself out of business if he doesn’t make cakes for gays. Bam…freedom of association in action. No law needed.

          • Dorian Gamble

            Ok, by your logic, I could open a business, refuse to serve Christians or white men, and that is my right. Does anyone here really believe that this would be acceptable with the public and with conservatives? Just imagine the “patriotic” outcry… We are operating on the slippery slope here and discrimination laws exist for a reason. In know empathy is difficult for conservatives, but perhaps they could imagine living in a smaller community where they were actually a minority (noooo!!!!!) and could not use many basic services because of legal business prejudice. Don’t tell me they should go live somewhere else either since this is clearly not an easy option nor is it feasible for most of the country to uproot itself based on whether the political atmosphere suits them.

          • D Lll

            You can certainly refuse to serve whoever you like. You run a business and your decisions will either get you more business or put you out of business. You don’t need the government to tell you who you need to serve. You are more than capable of making your own decisions. Your decisions and the communities reaction to those decisions will dictate how well your business does.

            If you value working hard, respecting others, and making money my guess is that you would serve everyone that comes in the door.

            If your religious or philosophical beliefs affect your business sense than you may offend some people and either lose business or go out of business altogether.

          • chris

            What we conservatives are truly sick of is the lies and having your debauchery shoved down our throats at every corner. I have no problem with you performing whatever acts of debauchery you wish. I do, however, object to having those acts shoved in my face ever time I turn around. Keep your sexual exploits and penchants to yourself and yours. You need not splash it about every web site you come across!

          • Herkulease

            You should be able to deny service to anyone for any reason. They can get their cake made elsewhere, and while they are at it send some bad advertising your way. Also, the cake thing is a freedom of religion type thing, not so much a freedom of speech. You need thicker skin, and maybe instead of protecting a gay woman’s right to have cake baked, focus on saving an unborn child. Priorities, please. Thank you.

          • Dean Scarpinato

            It all becomes personal to you doesn’t it? Is your question about the first Amendment or is is about my personal feelings about your sexual proclivities? Or is it just a veiled threat from a keyboard warrior?

            In the first place you believe a publicly traded company whose entire platform is the sharing and dissemination of info should limit the content of that info to that which does not offend Dorian Gamble. Then you accuse me of not understanding the first amendment. Logic like that could have gotten you hired on the Clinton Campaign. Too bad your heinous bitch was rejected by 95% of the US landmass.

            Then you claim that the same laws which apply to small business who for religious reasons and personal morals do not wish to participate in what they perceive to be an abomination do not apply in this case. Yet the courts say that they must.

            BUT then you not only cite this precedent you fail to recognize the obvious way in which it applies. No wonder in that you have had it both ways all your life. Living in your Mommas basement while still believing you are a valid adult.

            As for your threats, I’m easy to find and tough to beat, bitch. So bring it if you think you can.

          • Dorian Gamble

            I knew I could provoke you into making violent threats. Do you have any self-control at all or is that another virtue ? You seem like a totally happy and well-adjusted individual.
            You sure are curious as to what goes on in my bedroom (sorry, my mommy’s basement) – this seems to be a strange fetish among Trump supporters.
            FB was started as a social media site for personal communication, not for spreading the news. It has the right as a private company to limit whatever speech it wants, but somehow you believe that’s infringing on your rights. Again, you don’t seem to have a fundamental understanding of what the First Amendment means. Seeing as how the Supreme Court that interprets this law has had a conservative majority for decades now, who do you blame for this progress?
            Assuming I were a Democrat, (which you clearly do for convenience), how would you explain that Hillary won the popular vote by more than 1.5 million votes (and counting)?
            Your silly map has already been proven to be completely disingenuous – this is where being a critical thinker would have come in handy.

          • chris

            This is EXACTLY the sort of thing of which I have simply had enough. You and yours always attempting to provoke instead of trying to get along with others. Why is that sort of behavior just fine for you and not for others? Your double speak and dual standards belie an evil I would rather avoid.

          • Terry Licia

            You obviously know as little about math as you do about the popular vote and the US Constitution. Wow. Hate speech, threats of violence, what next? Lighting crosses on lawns?

          • chris

            Excuse me? Please – go delude yourself somewhere they might care. More 97% of the COUNTIES in this Country voted Trump. Grow up! Your ilk LOST the election. When will you people stop your incessant whining and learn to accept that which is?

          • Terry Licia

            LOL When you children learn that your elders know more than you about politics and government. Just because you have an opinion does not mean it’s well-informed or credible. You voted for Trump, whoopdedoo! He’s so close to impeach, and getting closer every day! And hell, he’s not been in office for 100 days yet, has he? People are wising up, kiddo! You will, too! His policies WILL affect the YM’s, the elderly and the working poor the hardest. Just hide and watch.

      • D Lll

        It does not. And people are getting wise to that fact.

        Verizon is a private company. Would you be OK if they said “we are going to cancel the phone lines for all the companies that are reported to be Fake News?”

        • Dorian Gamble

          One of the issues that I have is that there is more disinformation being spread than real.
          Just because the majority of these questionable articles support one candidate over the other seems to mean for most people that they are “true” regardless of the content. Apparently, what feels right is just as important as what the objective truth is. We all should have serious concerns over how this process happens and who decides what is fake or not. However, I feel that preventing the spread of blatant lies (on both political sides) is a worthy endeavor and public service.

      • Irish_Gypsy

        This is the 1st–the FIRST Amendment, we’re talking’ about here! Think about what you’re saying.

        • Dorian Gamble

          Did you even look at the links I provided earlier or are facts irrelevant? It is a platform actively being used to spread LIES. So the owner and creator of this platform decides he wants to change that and everyone cries? What happened to “suck it up buttercup” or does that only apply when it’s convenient for conservatives? Maybe try watching the last John Oliver show if you’d like a more nuanced take on how fake news is taking over.
          Trump has been actively threatening to change libel laws so he can sue journalists but we’re worried about getting our news on FB ? Where’s the outrage here ?

          • Terry Licia

            Did you hear, his wife IS filing a lawsuit against a man who merely repeated what he read on several social media sites AND a news site about her being a former high end escort?! Talk about having your cake and eat it, too! They’re both in the public eye now, are both public figures and as such, the laws for them are different. But if Trump changes those laws … oh katy bar the door! We will ALL be shutted up. Shades of Weimar Republic! Heil Trump!

          • chris

            Terry, Terry, Terry. Laws must be applied EQUALLY to all persons regardless of race, creed, color or any other “so called” dividing factor you care to dream up. or they are not laws!

            If an organization hires a lesser capable candidate simply because of their color, THAT is discrimination. It matters not whether the candidate was black, white, brown, sallow or GREEN! When will people learn to reason?

          • Terry Licia

            So, I could file a lawsuit if someone called me a whore? Not bloody likely! It’d be considered frivolous, a waste of the Court’s time. Because she is wealthy, and married to the President gives her no greater privilege under the law.

      • BruceWilliams

        Strange. Christian bakers have to bake cakes for gays, so why shouldn’t the first amendment apply to Face Book? Look at it this way, what would happen if a christian publisher refused to publish something for a satanist because he believed it to be false?

        • Terry Licia

          Do you mean like the Christian family that owned the craftstore that refused to provide birth control in its insurance plans for employees because it violated the family’s faith?

  • OvidiuGOA

    Just stop fucking using facebook

    • Dorian Gamble

      It is really just that easy people.

      • Terry Licia

        But Dorian, it’s so fun! Actually, I originally liked Facebook because it was so easy to share photos of family. We’re spread from Europe to Alaska, and with the super easy photo uploading, my family was able to stay in touch with ease. Every age group could use it, and that also was a big draw. Then, it became a near global com center, where one had to be very careful of what was shared with whom! Know your privacy settings, they say! But also know that any and everything on the Internet has been seen by the US Govt since before the web went public! Goodness, I knew this back in 1990! Actually, a few years before that. I don’t know why Americans are so shocked today. Part of being dumbed down? I am beginning to dislike that phrase, but I don’t know another that so succinctly defines the vast problem of American ignorance. Sigh.

  • Mike Lynch

    This is obviously a fake news story and Zuckerberg is going to have it discredited, censored and banned immediately.

    • Dorian Gamble

      This is an opinion piece, not a news story. The fact that you can’t tell the difference is one reason this needs to happen.

      • Dave Beers

        SEIG HEIL!

        • Dorian Gamble

          And your true allegiances become obvious.

        • Terry Licia

          It’s “Heil Trump” these days! Keep up with the times, dear.

  • michaelannb

    What about fake advertising? Like junk foods that rid you of Alzheimer’s or Diabetes?

    • Kathleen Redman

      Do you actually think they will target false advertising? They are targeting the true news so that only the fake news will be reported to the controlled masses and they can get away with whatever they want. The truth being told through social media is why Trump got into office. The networks ratings dropped like a dead balloon because everyone knew they were lying and covering up. They want their ratings back without changing their ways. Censoring the truth and calling it lies is the plot they are using to do that.

      • Terry Licia

        Wow! You drank a lot of the Kool-Aid, didn’t you?

  • Guy

    What a joke these people are .They are in the news information business and they tell us lies like this ,I am lost for words.

  • 30yrfed

    Teh simple response is quit using Facebook. You know Facebook is already used by the police stste to spy on and track people with the cooperation of Zuckerburg and co. Now they will be the police state’s propaganda arm. Stop using them cancel your accounts. Its as simple as that!!

    • Dorian Gamble

      Funny how alt-wrong parrots don’t seem to have a problem with FB openly sharing your personal information with the govenment, but want to draw the line at an attempt to moderate the spread of disinformation.

      • Irish_Gypsy

        As the word, “disinformation” is of Soviet Union lineage– it’s disinformation.

        • Terry Licia

          How about this word? LIE.

  • Steve Rusk

    Well that’s just great, Google and Facebook are now doing thought control.

  • HSR

    Well, i assume Zuckerberg can do with his company what he want to.
    Facebook is not a human right, or the whole world, many social medias or meeting/dating sites has restrictions for what can be expressed.
    So my suggestion is, if someone wants a free speach social media, make one.
    Facebook was made of Zuckerberg, so he as the CEO desides what can or cant be done there.

    People act like Facebook is a right, like it is something that means something, like what happens on facebook is the world..
    Its just a social media, the biggest so far yes, but facebook getting restrictions, does not mean society does, facebook is not society.
    You are society, and what you do in the real world, is what matters, not what you share on facebook.

  • Mathusla

    I know i would do a better job of policing Facebook than the current batch of dope smoking middle class sleepers.

  • Karll

    Right wing sites should have dropped FB as a discussion engine long ago.

    • Ingold Inglorion

      This, 1000%. And not just right wing sites, EVERYBODY.


    • Terry Licia

      Except … it did them SO MUCH GOOD … LOLOL! The writers of that ‘faux news’ have identified their audience, and it was the right wingers! Mwuahahaha!

      Except, of course, there were also all those gullibles they ripped off who believed in the diabetes and MS “cures” from rain forest veggies, and the fatties of every persuasion who paid billions for mad diets advertised on FB … and Reader’s Digest!

      Remember the copper bracelets and magnets advertised in the back of your Dad’s Argosy magazine? How about the X-ray Vision glasses kids saved up to buy from ads in comic books? PT Barnum was correct, there’s a sucker born every minute! The only difference is, thanks to the population explosion, there are MORE of them today than ever before!

      • Karll

        That was a lot of typing to say absolutely nothing.

  • Wendy Le Van

    We do not need a Facebook “sensor”. We were able to pick out the fake stories on CNN and mainstream media. And Facebook is in writing so we can always go back and the fakers will have to face the music.

    • Dorian Gamble

      You clearly are not capable of distinguishing a fake news story from a real one, as quoting CNN as one of your examples shows your obvious partisan bias. There are plenty of very good reasons that the educated people of America voted the way they did in this election. Critical thinking is not being taught in schools and so people just parrot whatever “news story” supports their position rather than weighing carefully the merits and sources of each.

  • lilbear68

    easy fix GTFO face book
    ppl forgot that FB was started with fed grant money and its been a data mine for every fed agency that wants to use it

  • Ingold Inglorion

    Here’s an easy solution: STOP USING FACEBOOK. Your little lives will not end if you don’t have your “kitty picture of the day” or a friend request from some dork you took typing class with in grade 9.


  • Baltimore48

    Hey Mr. Zuckerberg…ever heard of free speech and freedom of the press???? I guess journalists (uh, I mean propagandists) are the oldest profession–we call them “presstitutes.”

  • Harvey Mitterdorf

    It is time for FB to go the way of the dinosaur. Start a new platform. Boycott FB.

    • Tara McFly

      Check out http://www.seen.life. If we all went there then he could just censor himself.
      Use Mozilla Firefox instead of Google, with a search bar like DuckDuckGo or GoodGopher.
      I just changed over and feel safer with the new setup than before, as Google and Facebook are all about spying, tracking, and censorship. No more ads constantly flashing up, it’s almost peaceful.
      Screw these corporate entities, they’ve taken advantage of our good nature for long enough.
      Boycott time….

      • Terry Licia

        Beware this group! Owned by a former director of Intelius, and though it SAYS it is not going to sell your data, that there’s no spying, no tracking, censorships, etc etc. think again! And think .. SCAM!

        Calling fans of SEEN.LIFE social network (and also, SEEN.IS and UNSEEN.IS) .. you might be being scammed, and if so, the scammer thinks you’re stupid. Want to hear more? Read on, and then PLEASE SHARE this note. Don’t believe me and don’t want to read something you might not like? Goodbye and good luck!

        Its CEO a man named Chris Kitze. If you look at his LinkedIn page (https://www.linkedin.com/in/chriskitze) you’ll see that as well as being CEO of Seen.life, Unseen and Before It’s News, he is one of several directors of – amongst others – a company called iNome. According to his own blurb, he serves “on the board of directors of this rapidly growing personal intelligence company. An early investor, he joined the board to bring his experience in internet commerce and finance to help management guide the company to even greater success.”

        The Wikipedia entry for iNome (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inome) is very interesting as it details class action lawsuits the company has been embroiled in for its breaches of data protection laws and for automatically enrolling people into marketing programmes without their permission. There’s much more there too, read it yourself and find out how badly Kitze’s company appears to want to use your personal information for gain, and how little it seems the company he still invests in cares about how it does so. Want your private cellphone number made available without your consent? iNome, part-owned and directed by Chris Kitze, CEO can probably do it for you, based on past behaviour. Read the Terms of Service fully? Here’s a quote: “You will not interfere with Before It’s News’ or Seen.Life’s tracking of visits, page views, click throughs, or with the normal flow of traffic to, through, or from the Before It’s News or Seen.Life Services.” Yeah, they definitely track ya, honey!

        Then there’s the matter of security. Now I’m no encryption expert, but some of those who *are* have serious questions about both the actual security of Seen/Unseen and the deliberate misrepresentation of it in their FAQs). It’s an additional shame then that unseen’s only offeris their strongest security to those who are willing to give their credit card details, which seems dubious to me given iNome’s record, and exploitative since it’s being promoted on the back of a perceived lack of security elsewhere.

        So that’s the appeal to reason. Now here’s the appeal to emotion (with a bit more reason thrown in).

        As stated in their introductory text, seen. and unseen. are both operated by the people behind the website BeforeItsNews.com (BIN). Look harder and you’ll see that Chris Kitze is in fact the publisher (http://beforeitsnews.com/contributor/pages/0/004/bio.html). BIN is known for allowing the spread of untrue and scaremongering news stories, a policy which Kitze attempts to defend here: http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2014/08/why-are-there-so-many-fake-stories-on-before-its-news-3011970.html. From this response – basically stating that he’s proud of the fact that there is no editorial control or fact-checking, and anyone can post anything there – I believe that there is no way in which any reasonable person could consider the website a reliable ‘news’ site.

        Amongst the works of fiction hosted on BeforeItsNews are many which are those focussed on – frankly – lies about Facebook’s security and privacy concerns. There is much to criticise Facebook about, but these criticisms do not justify spreading lies; a cause worth fighting for will only be undermined if those who fight for it lie about it in order to further their aims. BIN was, it seems, the first site upon which the latest scare story spread, concerning the Facebook privacy “bombshell” on January 1st 2015 – a story that has been established by independent researchers to be false (http://www.snopes.com/computer/facebook/fbspying.asp). Who wrote the ‘bombshell’ story? Lisa Haven, a featured contributor on Beforeitsnews who has also been promoting seen/unseen in her writing and on other sites and blogs.

        Here’s my interpretation of the apparent timeline: BeforeItsNews facilitates the spreading of lies about Facebook, knowing that it will scare some Facebook users. Meanwhile the people behind BIN are working on an alternative social media site, with the aim of capturing that portion of Facebook’s userbase who are amenable to being frightened by scare stories without taking the time to research the facts themselves. When the site (seen/unseen) is ready for the masses, a fake story about a non-existent privacy ‘bombshell’ is spread on BIN and other sites, along with heavy promotion for its own alternative.

        “Capice?”, as Al Capone might have said?

        Of course, none of this is proof of a conspiracy but I believe that this conclusion is supported by the publicly-available evidence.

        Again, if you read the promo information on seen/unseen, you will see that the site is ad-supported (just like Facebook), and NO claims are made about enhanced security from interception by national security services outside Iceland. Remember that the vast, vast majority – approaching 100% – of internet traffic passes through the USA at some stage in its travels, at which point it is vulnerable to the dragnet info trawling by performed by the NSA, which takes place where international fibre optic data cables enter the country, as revealed by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden.

        There is no escape from this at the moment – every piece of data that passes through the internet potentially ends up in the NSA’s enormous new data centre in Utah – INCLUDING everything sent to and from seen/unseen! Iceland is a fantastic country and its own data protection laws are well-formulated; however once data leaves the country all bets are off.

        Seen/unseen and BIN therefore seem intended to be a home to the credulous, who will have their social media supported by advertising revenue – adverts for products which will no doubt be in alignment with the worldview and mindset of its creators (chemtrail protection agent, or expensive DVDs discussing the aliens who live on Nibiru/Planet X come to mind, judging from the kinds of ‘news’ stories BIN hosts). It would be no surprise to me if many of the adverts on seen/unseen direct consumers to online shops associated with that other apparent anti-science haven NaturalNews, as this site has also been pushing many of the same lies and promoting seen/unseen.is.

        Personally I do not believe that these sites’ owners believe much of what they promote, as the analytical and critical thinking skills necessary to code a large, stable website seem – to me – to be at odds with the lack of such skills necessary to believe the fiction they promote as fact… but I may be wrong, just as I may be wrong with all the opinions and interpretations I make here.

        Nonetheless, I urge you to reconsider your membership of seen/unseen, because in my opinion, the motives of its creators are murky at best – and at worst, deliberately destructive of intelligent, critical thought whilst being downright cynically exploitative.

        Of course it’s possible that you may think of me as a ‘shill’ – that I’m being paid by the agents of darkness to try and stop beings of light and enlightenment from finding their true home so that they may usher in a new age of planetary consciousness, or some such. If that’s the case then there is no point in telling you the truth about myself, but I will anyway…if you aske nicely!

        From the publicly-available facts as they are, my interpretation is that seen/unseen and their parent website beforeitsnews.com offer none of the things they promise.

        Those concerned with Facebook’s approaches to security, privacy, advertising and censorship should consider joining Diaspora: a free, decentralised and open-source social network where you own your own data and are free to present yourself however you like, and which offers the ability to stay in touch with your network on Facebook. Find out more at https://diasporafoundation.org/. I have no prior association with Diaspora and benefit in no way from sharing information about them. But as said above, if you think ANYTHING you say or have said at any time, on the Internet is not already SEEN by the Us Govt, then … think again! 🙂


    • Dave Beers

      http://minds.com, brought to you by the folks of Anonymous.

  • winkwink1

    It’s only true if we are told it’s true? We don’t need to be told what to think. We know how to think for ourselves. We are not part of the lib gov indoctrination program through public schools and colleges receiving gov funding.

    • Dorian Gamble

      Teaching critical thinking is not lib gov indoctrination. I am a college educator and I get really sick of this attitude. Critical thinking is the ability to hold two separate ideas in your head simultaneously and judge which is more valid based on the information supporting each. Your emotional attachment to partisan thinking prevents this from happening (also maybe the two ideas at the same time ?). I cannot emphasize enough that you DO NOT KNOW how to think for yourself as evidenced by your statement that education is “part of the lib gov indoctrination program.” If you actually attended college and took a science class you would realize how wrong your sentiment is, but it’s much easier to fault educators for your own inadequacies.

      • Dave Beers

        You’re too close to the problem. I’ve been a libertarian since the mid 70’s, and have time and again had my views not only challenged on campus by “educators”, but completely shut down for daring to disagree with some sacrosanct opinion.

        I do find it interesting that you suggest to winkwik1, that they should take a science class. Why not a history, econ or social science class? That is where most of the dishonesty and misinformation is entrenched. And I daresay you probably know it.

        • Dorian Gamble

          I say a science class for very good reasons and I believe you are right that misinformation and dishonesty are more entrenched in those subjects.
          The Scientific Process teaches us to not be attached to the outcome and to the data. It teaches us that any result must be able to be replicated for it to be valid – peer published and reviewed. It teaches critical thinking and healthy skepticism above all other – if you have a differing opinion you must have actual evidence to back this up. I’m not saying that scientists don’t become attached to their pet theories, but there is an actual objective truth to be found here that should not be subverted by politics.
          You are correct about the ad hominem and I should try and take the high road since I am advocating for the value of education.

          • Terry Licia

            Dorian, I’ve agreed with everything you’ve said until that last paragraph. Calling a spade a spade is correct, if it’s not a hammer. If a person is dumb, or has been ‘dumbed down’ then they are, factually, ignorant! DUMB! Like I said above, it is not an argument ad hominem if it’s true. We are surrounded by people who are either being deliberately obtuse or are incredibly dumb given the educational opportunity in this nation. They are choosing to be ignorant. And worse, they somehow think that being dumb is better than being smart! Make America great again? America has always been great – make Americans great again! The dummies!

        • Terry Licia

          Its not an argument ad hominem if it’s true. People in the US are dumb. Why can you accept the ‘dumbing down of Americans’ and then debate that American ARE dumb?! I suppose we should be grateful that they’re not stupid because at least ignorance can be cured!

          • Dave Beers

            Apparently you didn’t spot the ad hominem I referenced. If you had, you would not have relied on your own use of the sweeping generalization.

      • Kathleen Redman

        So what do you really know about creation or the true age of the earth? Guess you are teaching it all? or instead teaching only evolution and calling it truth. If this is so then the truth is indeed revealed that you are part of the indoctrination, calling it science. When the blind lead the blind they both fall in the ditch.

        • Dorian Gamble

          OMG please go back to school. Using radiometric dating establishes the true age of the rocks and is a fundamental objective truth. Evolution is not an opinion, it is backed up by mountains of evidence. If you have a better theory that CAN BE TESTED, I’d love to hear it. I’ve had lots of students like you before and most end up dropping out rather than facing facts that aren’t convenient.
          You don’t even know enough about this subject to have an informed opinion. Funny how you embrace the aspects of science that have bettered your life while rejecting those that conflict with your religious views. Science is not like the Bible where you can pick and choose which passages are convenient for you. Go live in a cave if you want to reject the all the technology that has come from scientific progress. Start with the computer you use to parrot your ignorance.

        • Terry Licia

          Are you being deliberately funny, or are you as blind and dumb as you sound? Tell me, what is the difference between creationism in the classroom and Sharia law in the courtroom?

      • D Lll

        I knew it. Your a college indoctrinator.. That explains it. I taught for many years and finally got out of it to go to the private sector. It took a few years but I woke up to how brainwashed I was during my years as an educator.

        The colleges today complete with safespaces, self segregation, and “studies” classes do nothing to foster critical thinking.

        • Dorian Gamble

          I don’t always support some of the PC silliness that goes on at colleges, but this conversation shows me the value of education. Did you learn that you + are is a contraction and is spelled “you’re” while you were supposedly a professor? Also, there should be a comma after “a few years”. I expect my students to have some basic knowledge of grammar and punctuation and I do not teach English. Obviously, I don’t believe you and criticizing students for wanting to gain more knowledge and better themselves means that you stand for what, ignorance?

          • D Lll

            Thanks for pointing out the errors in my writing. I find that teachers will often resort to petty stuff like this to avoid the actual subject at hand. Going back and forth between Twitter, FB, and blogs you learn to type quickly to make your point. You ignore the fools that act like grammar nazis and interact more with folks that may have an open mind.

            I never said I was a professor. I said I was an educator. I guess you don’t consider HS teacher to be an educator. I have children in college and countering the misinformation they get has to be crammed into long weekends and holiday weeks along with a few facetime conversations (sorry..did i need a comma in there some where?) Also, as a Math/science teacher I dealt more with understanding of concepts and didn’t sweat the small stuff like punctuation.

          • Dorian Gamble

            I can’t control the curriculum that high schools make you teach, nor do I always agree with it. I hold all educators in great respect and I must apologize for being a grammar Nazi.
            I am also more interested in talking about concepts and I am curious as to which ones you found to be full of misinformation. I am not saying this in an accusatory fashion – I have a huge problem with school boards full of unqualified and uneducated people making decisions about what our children should be learning.

          • Terry Licia

            I would not consider you an educator if you were teaching my child. If you cannot spell correctly, you have no business teaching – especially children! My math and science teachers in elementary school and high school were as demanding as any of my literature and social studies teachers. But then, they went to college to learn the subjects they were teaching. Sometime after about 1985, I believe, students pursuing careers in education began taking classes in how to teach! The dumbing down began ….

          • D Lll

            I really don’t care what you think.

            If you think good spelling makes a good teacher than you have a lot to learn about life.

          • Terry Licia

            I’m quite sure I have lots to learn about life! The fantastic education I’ve received thus far has left me with a great lust for even more knowledge. However, I believe you misunderstand my statement. Your flippant dismissal of correct grammar reflects an ‘educator’ who chose not to fully educate. That is inadequate, whether you care or not is irrelevant. An education that neglects details has left several generations ignorant, credulous, uncivil and susceptible to propaganda, lies and outlandish conspiracy theories.

            Americans want “America to be great – again” yet it is Americans who need to be great again! How? We could start by paying attention to details and small courtesies that some deem unimportant, or perhaps they consider these details irrelevant or “not my job.” Yet it is such things as correct grammar and civility, all the time, everywhere, that are the foundation upon which a just society is built, and in which critical thinking occurs. Without that, we shall never shine – again.

          • D Lll

            First of all I have not been an educator in many years.

            I agree that spelling is important but in the grand scheme of things ideas and concepts are WAY more important. Especially in math and science. If you are an English teacher, then you obviously put more stress on grammar/spelling more regardless of the topic you are covering.

            You “not my job” comment is exactly what you need to work on. Teach your subject to the best of your ability. Don’t give a science teacher a hard time about punctuation and don’t give an English teacher a hard time if they cannot multiply three digit numbers in their head.

            As far a civility is concerned, you need to learn that the written word is often easy to misinterpret. You stated that “I would not consider you an educator if you were teaching my child.” I took offense to that and I responded accordingly.

      • winkwink1

        I thank you for your reply. I do have my degree. I had an excellent science instructor and engineering instructor. Both of which did not just give you an answer, but made you think it through. Which was extremely frustrating at times. I thank these two today for the wonderful job they did. On the other hand I also had a government instructor and history instructor that didn’t appreciate different points of view. You either thought their way or they made it very difficult for you. I have seen both sides.

        • Dorian Gamble

          I appreciate your civility – too little on both sides since the election and I am not always completely innocent of spewing angry rhetoric.
          My experience with these subjects has also often been less than satisfactory. It seemed like the instructors were more interested in you regurgitating their beliefs than having an in-depth understanding of the foundations. I am obviously biased towards my field (earth sciences), but I felt like some professors almost had to make up for the more subjective nature of their material by being even more rigid. As you indicated, this is the opposite of teaching critical thinking and if their opinions are motivated from ego or politics, it is completely inappropriate.

    • Terry Licia

      The problem is, you don’t THINK. You just read it and because you read it online, you take it for truth. You internalize it as truth because you saw it online! It’s like my grandmother used to say, “Believe half of what you read and none of what you hear!” She meant newspapers and television. Today, the internet has replaced both. But her message is as useful! A major faux-news writer, Paul Horne, was amazed at how MANY people actually believed his lies! Never even questioned them! Guess who those readers were, by and large? Read the story and weep: https://www.adn.com/nation-world/2016/11/17/facebook-fake-news-writer-i-think-donald-trump-is-in-the-white-house-because-of-me/

  • ImOffendedTreatMeSpecial

    A poor marksman shooting at the wrong target. The fake “news” Is on ABC, NBC, MSNBC, CBS, CNN, Bloomberg, and NPR.

    • Dorian Gamble

      You didn’t mention Fox News, Brietbart, The Observer, Infowars – interesting.

      • Kathleen Redman

        Briebart and infowars, and some of what’s on Fox is where we get our true news. These are the ones they WANT to target.

        • Dorian Gamble

          You don’t seem to understand the concept of unbiased and objective reporting. Trading one supposedly politically biased source for another is not going to get you any closer to the truth. Do you ever consider for a moment whether these sources are being truthful with you or whether they have an obvious agenda ?

          • chris

            and I suppose that Wiki-Leaks is fake news as well, despite exposing that treacherous, lying, conniving beast of a bitch Hillary and her complicit Clinton News Network – er CNN – aaa, same thing … and that wicked liar Megyn Kelly on Fox is just as bad, if not WORSE because she purports herself to be unbiased and still has the mendacity to face us each night with her lies.

            Quite frankly there is no place to get the REAL NEWS. There is no such thing as Journalistic Integrity any more.

  • desertpirate

    Isn’t there someone out there, who isn’t “in the bag” for the establishment, to take on facebook, twitter et al and give us an open forum?
    Zuckerberg shouldn’t be allowed to be the arbitor of “truth” for a community as large as facebook.

  • Dorian Gamble

    If you get your news from Facebook you are an idiot. This whole piece could be summarized in that simple statement.
    They are a private comapany who can feed you whatever information they want. It takes some research to determine the truthiness and accuracy of a story and that impetus is on the reader, not Zuckerberg. When idiots keep passing on stories they haven’t even read, it leads to misinformaton. Critical thinking is what’s missing here – a total lack of eduction on how to judge the validity of sources. It’s hard to fault Zuckerberg for our nation being sooooo uneducated.

  • Christopher Vaughn

    This is the beginning of news censorship online. Already the major news networks are for the most part so biased in reporting that they really can no longer even be called news networks; rather they are propaganda machines spinning for their own purposes or that of the political cronies they represent.

  • mellissner

    How will Zuckerberg rate CNN. FAKE. GENUINE. SKEPTICAL?

  • D Lll

    Will the same people that fact checked all the claims of WMDs in Iraq (leading to the deaths of millions while spending trillions) be in charge of fact checking Fake news?

    • Dorian Gamble

      In that case, the administration knew the information they were presenting to the public was false. When confronted about it, they responded by outing a CIA operative (a crime for which Scooter Libby was convicted) and changing their war narrative to claim the invasion was suddenly about helping the Iraqi’s.

      • D Lll

        As Wikileaks has shown us the Administration works hand in hand with the MSM. Whether the administration runs the CIA or the CIA runs the Administration is debatable.

  • Dorian Gamble

    If we’re talking about censorship, let’s see if this post gets through. The author does not mention that a great deal of the “news stories” passed on FB are either full of misinformation or outright lies. You’re really just gonna take Zuckerberg’s “99%” quote as truthful and then try and use that to support your argument ? The author also conveniently mentions one Snopes article that SHE WROTE as support for her argument and then tries and use this as an example of their fallibility. I’d also love to know just what alternative news sources were found to “have integrity”, as if predicting the election results somehow validated the blatant falsehoods that were spread. Here are some ACTUAL hard statistics about the spread of fake new stories:


    Yes, false information was given more attention by FB users than real ones. also, fake new stories favoring the Donald were almost 4x as common as ones supporting Hillary. OBVIOUSLY THERE IS A PROBLEM. If you don’t have a problem with Macedonia providing our news content then you should continue to blindly read whatever stories your friends have passed on without even reading it themselves.

    Where you get you news matters a great deal as far as how informed you are:


    Very poorly written article with no attempt made to address consenting any opinions and the only sources quoted are her own partisan regurgitation. This paper would not pass muster in a basic college writing class and actually negates the point that FB users can be trusted to think for themselves.

    • Kathleen Redman

      Snopes has lost all credibility with me. Snopes is nothing more than a man and woman searching the Internet and giving their own liberal opinion. http://www.angrypatriotmovement.com/who-is-behind-snopes/

      • Dorian Gamble

        I read the article you used to back up your opinion and it’s full of partisan claims that they make absolutely no attempt to verify. Whether you agree with Snopes or not, there has to be some attempt at OBJECTIVITY for us to determine the truth. Relying on such an obviously biased site to support your argument just proves the actual value of real journalism. I would point out that the “Angry Patriot Movement” (really??) site you have referenced uses examples to try and discredit Snopes that have mostly to do with their perceived political affiliation rather than actually questioning the data they use or the references they use. Attacking the person rather than their methodology is not considered a valid criticism. The selective sampling bias and prejudice you presented as an argument just underscores the fact that people just read whatever reinforces their own viewpoint rather than caring about the TRUTH.

      • Di

        The media is neither liberal nor conservative unless it follows their agenda while the masters behind the curtain who own the media manipulate the populace. You are programmed by the media to believe everything is one side’s fault or the other called divide and conquer. They have hundreds of physiologists to manipulate your thoughts.

  • Ronnie Allen

    I just heard a Latino journalists on Fox News claimed it is their job to tell a story in regards to reporting the news. It is not their job to tell a story it is their job to report the facts whether they agree with the facts or not.

  • Kathleen Redman

    As usual, those promoting fake news and news cover-ups are the very ones claiming the true news being posted on social media is the fake news. LIES! They are upset they cant get away with their brainwashing plan because people are finding out the truth. The silencing of all news they don’t like is nothing but silencing the people’s voice who want to reveal the truth.

  • Richard Bagenstose

    i want to know who gave zookinshit the right to censor any one , he is a left wing zelot , and if he doesn’t like your post he bans you, put the bitch out of business, he is silencing the freedom of speech, they can post their point of view but if they don’t like your point of view they silence you, i know they baned me because of hillary and obomaboy

  • Jesusprotectus

    It took me years to join fb, but not long to leave it permanently. And guess what? THERE
    IS LIFE WITHOUT FACEBOOK lol. Because of fb, I never joined twitter or any other social intrusive indoctrination sites.

    Time for fb to fall flat…there is an up and comer FREE SPEECH proponant GAB…in beta version now, but check it out….FREEDOM IS EVERYTHING !


  • Zaphod Braden

    FACEBOOK, TWITTER, YOUTUBE, GOOGLE are PLACES OF PUBLIC GATHERING, “SOCIAL Media”, and ADVERTISE themselves as PUBLIC places.. They are also PUBLICLY TRADED CORPORATIONS, unlike the PRIVATELY owned and operated “Mom&Pop” Bakery and Party Planner SUED by homosexuals.
    FACEBOOK is a PUBLIC SPACE therefore it has no right or legal option to censor participants. FACEBOOK is a PUBLICLY TRADED company, NOT a “private entity” and it solicits PUBLIC memberships.
    Just as cake bakers HAVE to bake homosexual cakes, and wedding planners HAVE to “accept” homosexual weddings, SUCKERberg has to accept opinions, videos, and pictures he does not like.
    The same applies to ALL “social media”, YOUTUBE, and search engines.
    A lowly COUNTY CLERK was jailed for refusing to “do her duty” by not issuing homosexuals marriage licenses The Baker, Planner, and Clerk SHOULD have just said: “You homosexuals VIOLATE OUR COMMUNITY GUIDLINES” !!!

    • Dorian Gamble

      Are community guidelines based on your religious beliefs ? I thought that America’s founders made sure that separation of church and state was a priority for a reason.
      Your legal interpretation is not that of our judiciary and that’s very fortunate for our actual freedoms as the clerk found out. Government employees in particular also do not have the authority to interpret laws as they see fit. If they have religious objections about performing their required duties they should not have applied for a public service job under the government they hate so much.
      It’s only fun when discrimination works for you instead of against you. I find your homophobia quite laughable – so many like you willing to cast the first stone.

      • Zaphod Braden

        NAZIS were put in power by homosexuals.

        • Dorian Gamble

          I thought the Nazis killed non-aryans and homosexuals in concentration camps, but my history must be faulty. I don’t suppose you could be bothered to provide a link for your silliness so we can all point and laugh…

          • Zaphod Braden

            Brown Shirts

          • Dorian Gamble

            I haven’t done any non-football related screaming for a while now.

            You mentioned the will of the majority – Hillary’s up by 1.5+ million votes and counting. Also look at the N.C. governors race for a real example of someone refusing to accept the will of the majority.

            If the concerns of non-dgkaio people are restricting the rights of others based on their convenient religious beliefs, then I don’t give a fig about their beliefs.

            Your views on homosexuality are not supported by fact or SCIENCE. This “UNNATURAL ABBERATION” appears in almost 10% of animal species. These deviant species have rejected the bible and “chosen” to engage in gayness. You should actually be preaching to the sheep.



          • Dorian Gamble

            Pantsuit !!!!

          • Zaphod Braden

            They scream “tolerance” but they are INtolerant.
            They scream “HATERS” but look at their twisted faces and spittle dripping mouths.
            They scream “democracy” but they refuse to accept the will of the MAJORITY.
            There has been ZERO concern for the RIGHTS and FEELINGS of the NON-lbgtafd People, So I see ZERO reason to give a Flying FIG about theirs.
            There are TWO sexes. Male – Female. Anything else is an UNNATURAL ABBERATION.. A man in a woman’s clothes does not make him a woman. Men should not get to be in Women’s bathrooms or lockers!

  • gary

    you cant trust jews

    • Dorian Gamble

      People are saying that you can’t trust ignorant rednecks with a keyboard. What country is “isreal” again ?

  • gary

    bds facebook trump and isreal

  • Thomas Vickers

    Once people understand that nothing is true until we accept it, that our beliefs make our reality, that we must make decisions based in the now rather than trying to let our past guide our future and planning a future only eliminates all other plans…including better ones, then media is likely to have far less impact but in most realities people don’t know this so they base decisions on false info. Media should just be considered not true unless you yourself witness it in person.

  • Paul M

    Maybe he should check this.Cnn Bbc Fake news


    • Dorian Gamble

      You do know that RT is the Russian media mouthpiece right ? I think you’re proving the opposite point of what you intend here.

      • TecumsehUnfaced

        So you are saying that RT is analogous to the NYT, WaPo, the Guardian, and MSNBC?

  • Bruce

    By attempting to put an end to free speech, these guys are forcing the populace to become more and more nationalistic and aggressive. Big mistake happening here.


    In the beginning there was an idea so big that it was perceived that no one entity or person could or should control it and came to be known as the http://WWW./internet. It launched the information age and was given freely to the world.
    Mark Z. you had better think this issue over before if you make a move. You will be in the court of public opinion and opinions are like a-holes,’everybody got at least one’.
    I agree that one has to be care full while surfing but, I can see, read and interpret
    content, and or the lack of same to determine if it is BS ,may have some merit or have
    a good bit of merit and on the later two investigate further to confirm.Which is why gave
    up on SNOPES bias’s a long time ago.
    You are a numbers man. Try this stat on for size -Your U.S. market voted at approximate
    50/50 can you stand to alienate half of you users. I believe that is what you will get, AND YOU ARE ALREADY ON SHAKEY GROUND,for meddling (perceived as taking sides) in
    this last election, so don’t inject your personal ideology into your business.

    Just a little food for thought and friendly advice M.A.

  • Irish_Gypsy

    It is evident that “fake news” is akin to, and will be used no differently than many, what could be ‘labelled’ as, identity politics narratives. The ism’s and ists malarky only serves to deliberatly divide for the purpose of chaos. “Rules For Radicals”, anybody? The “fake news” propaganda however, is arguably more dangerous. “1984”, anybody? At the risk of being labeled a conspiracy theorist (I prefer–bigger picture analyst), I’d go as far to say the destruction of “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness” has been in the works, incrementaly evolving, for more than a few decades. Look up the Tavistock Institute, this doesn’t apply solely to news. Since censorship, and that is precisely what the “fake news” narrative aims at, I will (aka-I’ll) try to stick to that-in the bigger scheme.

    Unbeknownst to the protesters causing hate and discontent across the nation (as well as destroying property that aint theirs), they are serving as useful idiots in the war on free speech. True irony is that these (at least some-paid) mobs, and those that snivel over an innouculate word or comment, would be the first to take offense at the term itself. Long story–short: These same fools will be the ones flagging anything and everything and serve as some examples of a tactic. And timing being everything—getting cold outside.

    Begs a question, doesn’t it? Besides–are fallacy’s still taught in critical thinking? How or why don’t these kids (mostly?) not know they are being used? Disclaimer: These were taken from a variety of sources and they do appear to overlap, but the theme is the same.
    Aristotle–“Give me a child when he’s 7 and I will show you the man.” No offense intended for the use of “man”.
    Lenin–“Give me one generation of youth and I will transform the world.”
    Hitler–“He alone, who owns the youth, gains the future.” Also, “Universal education is the most corroding and disintegrating poison that liberalism has ever invented for it’s own.” Please look up how brutal the Hitler Youth became, and how they got there.
    Have seen where a developer, when receiving an award, actually quoted a combo of Aristotle and Hitler to underscore the need for early childhood development. Hmm. Obviously, there are powers who aim to keep children as malleable possible for as long as possible. Thus, safe spaces, diaper pins, and on and on, thus infantilizing them.
    Look up what 8th graders needed to know in order to pass before the STATE, I mean, Dept. of Ed. came into existence.

    To the elites, building the “fake news” narrative is simply the the next step. Having sufficiently brainwashed the younger population, progressivism demands it spread. Subterfuge was, again, used when the narrative of “alt-right” was coined. Set the stage to hammer on sites that don’t propogate their agenda.

    As has been mentioned in previous posts, we are free to go to other sites/search engines. How long will that be the case after ICAAN is fully implemented?

    Sadly, society has taken far too many steps down this road. Gonna be bumpy and dusty. I just pray that the ditch isn’t too deep. Shovels- anyone?

  • StPete


    I don’t see a big problem here. I do see some crap on your own page, however…

  • FiuToYou

    What about everybody QUIT Face book and fuck Fuckerberg!!! (good name frenchie mama!)

  • Terry Licia

    Headline: “Facebook fake-news writer: ‘I think Donald Trump is in the White House because of me’ ” (Alaska Dispatch, Nov 2016, from writer at Washington Post). Read it and weep, dummies: https://www.adn.com/nation-world/2016/11/17/facebook-fake-news-writer-i-think-donald-trump-is-in-the-white-house-because-of-me/

  • Terry Licia

    Highlights from that news article: “What do the Amish lobby, gay wedding vans and the ban of the national anthem have in common? For starters, they’re all make-believe — and invented by the same man. Paul Horner, the 38-year-old impresario of a Facebook fake-news empire, has made his living off viral news hoaxes for several years. He has twice convinced the Internet that he’s British graffiti artist Banksy; he also published the very viral, very fake news of a Yelp vs. “South Park” lawsuit last year. But in recent months, Horner has found the fake-news ecosystem growing more crowded, more political and vastly more influential: In March, Donald Trump’s son Eric and his then-campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, even tweeted links to one of Horner’s faux-articles. His stories have also appeared as news on Google.”

    • TecumsehUnfaced

      No, Trump got elected because the thoroughly venal Democrats stole the nomination for a widely detested candidate and got out-cheated in election.

      People also got “dumber” because they are working two/three part time jobs to stay afloat and don’t have the time to read, study, and think to become smart like you.

      • Terry Licia

        Maybe if you didn’t sit around watching ridiculous dieting videos and cartoons, and actually cracked a few books, instead of ranting and raving about “Zionists” constantly, you’d have time for an education. However, I do believe your constant anti-semitic hate speech shows a mind steeped in furious hatefulness. No one can learn if they are burdened with such malignant feelings.

        • TecumsehUnfaced

          Hehehe! Maybe you would be able to converse intelligently if you didn’t sit around all the time fabricating silly slanders.

          You are either so uneducated or so mendacious that you equate being against genocidal country stealing with anti-Semitism. It’s an old trick and you look silly using it.

          Anti-Semitism, It’s a trick we always use it.

          It’s a 19th century mistake adopted for calumny. Ashkenazi aren’t Semites, but Arabs are.


  • Terry Licia

    I listed a link to the Washington Post interview with one of the most prolific faux-news contributors on FB, Paul Horner. He admitted how much he earned from spreading lies, and even the point that it scared him about how “dumb” FB users were because they believed him, and reshared everything! The article was reprinted in the Alaska Dispatch on November 17, 2016. I see that others commenting on here are listing other websites as reference points, but I’m not? Well, here’s the link again … let’s see if FREE THOUGHT allows this to stay up! https://www.adn.com/nation-world/2016/11/17/facebook-fake-news-writer-i-think-donald-trump-is-in-the-white-house-because-of-me/

  • Tom

    So not really ‘chilling’ but actually quite sensible.

    Maybe if your site wasn’t full of misleading clickbait and you actually did some journalism then you wouldn’t be worried…?

  • Irish_Gypsy

    It appears the whole “fake news” baloney, was just that. Whatever the fakers intention, the end result spurred censorship moves.
    “National Public Radio launched an investigation of “fake news” sites — which Democrats blame for President-elect Donald Trump’s victory — and found, to its surprise, that the “godfather” of fake news is a liberal Democrat from Culver City, California.”
    Breitbart’s report goes on, “Once Coler agreed to an interview, he told NPR that the purpose of starting his fake news empire in 2013 was “to highlight the extremism of the white nationalist alt-right” — or, in Coler’s exact words: “The whole idea from the start was to build a site that could infiltrate the echo chambers of the alt-right, publish blatantly false or fictional stories, and then be able to publicly denounce those stories and point out the fact that they were fiction.”…”The sites include NationalReport.net, USAToday.com.co, WashingtonPost.com.co. All the addresses linked to a single rented server inside Amazon Web Services. That meant they were all likely owned by the same company. Jansen found an email address on one of those sites and he was able to link that address to a name: Jestin Coler.”
    “Online, Coler was listed as the founder and CEO of a company called Disinfomedia.
    Coler’s company, Disinfomedia, owns many faux news sites — he won’t say how many. But he says his is one of the biggest fake news businesses out there, which makes him kind of like a godfather of the industry.”
    “Really the financial part of it isn’t the only motivator for me. I do enjoy making a mess of the people that share the content that comes out of our site. It’s not just the financial incentive for me. I still enjoy the game, I guess.” I’ll leave that for the well-informed to decide.
    The original NPR article:
    Could never quite put my finger on the “alt-right” narrative. It MAY have evolved from the innocuous statement. “‘We’re the platform for the alt-right’,” [Formerly of Breitbart] Bannon told me [Sara Posner, commentary for Mother Jones] proudly when I interviewed him at the Republican National Convention (RNC) in July”. Posner goes on to list the usual generalizations and straw men, which are constant used to marginalize and demean huge swath of Americans.
    In a twist of irony, as public sponsored, NPR responsibly reported on the “fake news” phenomena, they are quick to shrug journalistic integrity, “Bannon is the former CEO of Breitbart News, an online news site that he previously called “the platform for the alt-right.” While this is correct, Elizabeth Jensen writes, “Happily, from my point of view, the language NPR used to describe Bannon and the movement evolved quickly away from just “alt-right.” As standards editor Mark Memmott wrote Monday in an internal memo, “additional words are needed because many in the audience either have not heard of it or aren’t sure what it is.”
    “He laid it out in guidance to the staff:
    The views of the alt-right are widely seen as anti-Semitic and white supremacist.
    It is mostly an online movement that uses websites, chat boards, social media and memes to spread its message. (Remember the Star of David image that Trump received criticism for retweeting? That reportedly first appeared on an alt-right message board.)
    Most of its members are young white men who see themselves first and foremost as champions of their own demographic. However, apart from their allegiance to their “tribe,” as they call it, their greatest points of unity lie in what they are against: multiculturalism, immigration, feminism and, above all, political correctness.”
    “His advice concluded: “‘White nationalist’ is the most concise description,” and the NPR newsroom seems to be following that”directive.
    To take the irony further, numerous reports stating NPR will not be doing any/many live interviews with conservatives.

  • DrQuack32

    The paranoia is strong in this article. Text book case

  • Hugo Spinoso

    well giving majority a rule over whats fake has not been a good ide, besides it can be exploited.

    it seems to me points number 4,5 and 6 will do much more and doesnt really require all the others, minimal problems.