{"id":3001,"date":"2022-01-29T09:17:17","date_gmt":"2022-01-29T08:17:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/monblogeur.tech\/index.php\/2022\/01\/29\/in-trying-to-tackle-fake-news-facebook-is-cracking-down-on-real-science-the-new-statesman\/"},"modified":"2022-01-29T09:17:17","modified_gmt":"2022-01-29T08:17:17","slug":"in-trying-to-tackle-fake-news-facebook-is-cracking-down-on-real-science-the-new-statesman","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/monblogeur.tech\/index.php\/2022\/01\/29\/in-trying-to-tackle-fake-news-facebook-is-cracking-down-on-real-science-the-new-statesman\/","title":{"rendered":"In trying to tackle fake news, Facebook is cracking down on real science &#8211; The New Statesman"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"cfbc967f0983488262956e73eca9483a\" data-index=\"1\" style=\"float: none; margin:10px 0 10px 0; text-align:center;\">\n<script async src=\"https:\/\/pagead2.googlesyndication.com\/pagead\/js\/adsbygoogle.js?client=ca-pub-3859091246952232\" crossorigin=\"anonymous\"><\/script>\r\n<!-- blok -->\r\n<ins class=\"adsbygoogle\" data-ad-client=\"ca-pub-3859091246952232\" data-ad-slot=\"1334354390\"><\/ins>\r\n<script>\r\n     (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});\r\n<\/script>\r\n\n<\/div>\n<p>Support 100 years of independent journalism.<br \/>The platform\u2019s fact checkers found no inaccuracies in a recent BMJ investigation \u2013 but limited its reach anyway. Should they be playing moral police?<br \/>By                     <a href=\"https:\/\/www.newstatesman.com\/author\/rebeccacoombes\" class=\"\">Rebecca Coombes<\/a> and <a href=\"https:\/\/www.newstatesman.com\/author\/madlen-davies\" class=\"\">Madlen Davies<\/a>                <br \/>On 3 November, Howard Kaplan, a retired dentist from Israel, posted a <em>British Medical Journal<\/em> (<em>BMJ<\/em>) investigation to a private Facebook group. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.bmj.com\/content\/375\/bmj.n2635\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">The article<\/a> reported poor practices occurring at Ventavia, a research company contracted to run three trial sites for the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine.<br \/>The article brought record traffic to bmj.com, and was widely shared on Twitter. But a week later, Kaplan woke up to a message from Facebook. \u201cThe Facebook Thought Police has issued me a dire warning,\u201d he posted. \u201cFacebook\u2019s \u2018independent fact-checker\u2019 doesn\u2019t like the wording of the article by the BMJ. And if I don\u2019t delete my post, they are threatening to make my posts less visible\u2026 If it seems like I\u2019ve disappeared for a while, you\u2019ll know why.\u201d Other <em>BMJ<\/em> readers also reported problems sharing the story.<br \/>There are now <a href=\"https:\/\/reporterslab.org\/annual-census-finds-nearly-300-fact-checking-projects-around-the-world\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">around 300 fact-checking organisations<\/a> across the world, many of them fledgling companies with small budgets. Facebook in particular bestows a great deal of authority upon its 80 third-party fact checkers. But our recent experience at the <em>BMJ<\/em>, an established global publication, is that fact-checking can be incompetent, irresponsible and capable of suppressing already fully sourced and peer-reviewed journalism.<br \/>As well as warning Kaplan and others\u00a0not to share the story, the <em>BMJ<\/em> investigation was given a Facebook \u201cMissing Context\u201d label. (These warn that \u201cthis information could mislead people\u201d.) Readers were directed to a \u201cfact check\u201d article by Lead Stories, one of seven companies contracted by Facebook in the US, whose tagline is \u201cdebunking fake news as it happens\u201d. (According to <a href=\"https:\/\/popular.info\/p\/the-facts-about-facebooks-fact-checking\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">an analysis last year<\/a>, Lead Stories was responsible for half of all Facebook fact checks.)<br \/>Related<br \/>Our investigation was based on dozens of documents, provided by an experienced clinical trial auditor-turned-whistleblower, Brook Jackson. But the Lead Stories article said that none of the flaws Jackson had identified would disqualify the data collected from the main Pfizer vaccine trial. Quoting a Pfizer spokesperson, it said the drug company had reviewed an anonymous complaint and that \u201cactions were taken to correct and remediate\u201d: \u201cPfizer&#8217;s investigation did not identify any issues or concerns that would invalidate the data or jeopardize the integrity of the study,\u201d it concluded. Lead Stories identified no factual inaccuracies in the <em>BMJ<\/em>\u2019s article \u2013 but consistent with Facebook\u2019s <a href=\"https:\/\/about.fb.com\/news\/2021\/03\/mark-zuckerberg-announces-facebooks-plans-to-help-get-people-vaccinated-against-covid-19\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">policy<\/a> of combating misinformation over Covid-19, the platform reduced the article\u2019s distribution.<br \/>When the <em>BMJ<\/em> asked Lead Stories to remove its article and the \u201cmissing context\u201d label, pointing out errors in its own post (including describing the <em>BMJ<\/em> as a \u201cnews blog\u201d), Lead Stories declined. Its editor, Alan Duke, told the <em>BMJ<\/em> that the &#8220;missing context&#8221; label was created by Facebook specifically \u201cto deal with content that could mislead without additional context but which was otherwise true or real\u2026 Sometimes Facebook&#8217;s messaging about the fact checking labels can sound overly aggressive and scary. If you have an issue with their messaging you should indeed take it up with them as we are unable to change any of it.\u201d Duke added that the article was being shared by anti-vaccine activists, even though it did not suggest that the overall findings of the Pfizer trial had been skewed.<br \/>The <em>BMJ<\/em> wrote <a href=\"https:\/\/www.bmj.com\/content\/375\/bmj.n2635\/rr-80\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">an open letter<\/a> to the Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, appealing the rating. Zuckerberg didn\u2019t respond, but Lead Stories did. (It is an irony not lost on us that Nick Clegg, head of global affairs and communications at Meta, Facebook\u2019s parent company, is the grandson of Hugh Clegg, editor-in-chief of the <em>BMJ<\/em> from 1946 to 1965.) In a <a href=\"https:\/\/leadstories.com\/analysis\/2021\/12\/lead-stories-response-to-a-bmjcom-open-letter-objecting-to-a-lead-stories-fact-check.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">new blog post<\/a>, the fact checkers cast doubt on our whistleblower\u2019s credibility, saying that Jackson was not a \u201clab-coated scientist\u201d and that her qualifications amounted to a \u201c30-hour certification in auditing techniques\u201d. (Jackson has more than 15 years\u2019 experience in clinical research coordination and management.) Lead Stories <a href=\"https:\/\/leadstories.com\/hoax-alert\/2021\/11\/fact-check-british-medical-journal-did-not-reveal-disqualifying-and-ignored-reports-of-flaws-in-pfizer-vaccine-trial.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">added<\/a> that Jackson did not \u201cexpress unreserved support for COVID vaccines\u201d, pointing to two tweets posted after the <em>BMJ<\/em>\u2019s investigation. One criticised a <em>Sesame Street<\/em> episode in which Big Bird gets a Covid vaccine; another approved a US court ruling against mandating vaccination for federal employees.<br \/>Should Facebook compel anyone to express unreserved support on any one issue? Gary Schwitzer, adjunct associate professor of public health at the University of Minnesota and publisher of <em>HealthNewsReview<\/em>, which grades US news organisations\u2019 health reporting, told us: \u201cIt&#8217;s absolutely immaterial to the topic at hand. For it to be in this independent review, I think says more about the reviewer than the reviewee.\u201d Schwitzer told the <em>BMJ<\/em> the processes by which Facebook decides what gets fact-checked, and the contractors\u2019 systems for deciding which pieces they review are not transparent or consistent enough.<br \/><em><strong>[See also: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.newstatesman.com\/comment\/2021\/11\/its-the-tech-giants-not-socialist-politicians-who-are-coming-for-our-liberty\">It\u2019s the tech giants, not socialist politicians, who are coming for our liberty<\/a>]<\/strong><\/em><br \/>On 20 December, Lead Stories posted a series of inflammatory tweets criticising the <em>BMJ<\/em> and Paul Thacker, the author of the investigation. <a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/LeadStoriesCom\/status\/1472929863040438287?\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">One said<\/a>: \u201cHey @bmj_latest, when your articles are literally being republished by a website run by someone in the \u201cDisinformation Dozen\u201d perhaps you should be reviewing your editorial policies instead of writing open letters.\u201d (The article had been republished outside the <em>BMJ<\/em>\u2019s licence terms on an anti-vax site; the journal asked the site to take it down.)<br \/>When the <em>BMJ<\/em> appealed directly to Facebook, it was told: \u201cFact checkers are responsible for reviewing content and applying ratings, and this process is independent from Meta.\u201d Meta\u2019s Oversight Board, which last year removed Donald Trump from the platform, refused to consider the <em>BMJ<\/em>\u2019s appeal, saying that \u201cfact checking labels aren\u2019t something the Board\u2019s decisions currently cover\u201d.<br \/>So, in the absence of anything else, it is left to users to debate the fact checkers. Jillian York, director for international freedom of expression at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told the <em>BMJ<\/em>: \u201cI worry about the amount of power placed in the hands of these third-party groups\u2026 While I do see a role for fact-checking and think it&#8217;s far superior to the alternative \u2013 which is Facebook just taking down content \u2013 I still worry about the effect that it can have on legitimate sources.\u201d <br \/>Allowing fact checkers to take an editorial position is a concern for journalism more widely.\u00a0\u201cCompanies like Facebook and some of the traditional media establishments are reasonably concerned about vaccine misinformation,\u201d York said. \u201cBut they have swung so far in the opposite direction as to potentially shut down legitimate questions about major corporations like Pfizer.\u201d The medical industry has a history of suppressing certain information, she added; it is important that journalists can question it. The <em>BMJ<\/em> is making a final appeal to Meta\u2019s Oversight Board, but for now its investigation remains obscured on Facebook. <br \/>The unanswered question, according to the <em>BMJ<\/em>\u2019s editor-in-chief Kamran Abbasi, is: why is Facebook doing this? \u201cWhat is driving its world view? Is it ideology? Is it commercial interests? Is it incompetence?\u201d And in the future, who can readers trust: journals like the <em>BMJ<\/em>, a reputable publisher since 1840, staffed by doctors, journalists, technical editors and statisticians \u2013 or Facebook and its fact checkers?<br \/><em><strong>Rebecca Coombes is head of journalism at the &#8220;BMJ&#8221;. Madlen Davies is the journal\u2019s investigations editor.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.newstatesman.com\/science-tech\/2022\/01\/in-trying-to-tackle-fake-news-facebook-is-cracking-down-on-real-science\">source<\/a><\/p>\n<!--CusAds0-->\n<div style=\"font-size: 0px; height: 0px; line-height: 0px; margin: 0; padding: 0; clear: both;\"><\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Support 100 years of independent journalism.The platform\u2019s fact checkers found no inaccuracies in a recent BMJ investigation \u2013 but limited its reach anyway. Should they be playing moral police?By Rebecca Coombes and Madlen Davies On 3 November, Howard Kaplan, a retired dentist from Israel, posted a British Medical Journal (BMJ) investigation to a private Facebook [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"googlesitekit_rrm_CAow1sXXCw:productID":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3001","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-non-classe"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/monblogeur.tech\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3001","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/monblogeur.tech\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/monblogeur.tech\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/monblogeur.tech\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/monblogeur.tech\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3001"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/monblogeur.tech\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3001\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/monblogeur.tech\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3001"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/monblogeur.tech\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3001"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/monblogeur.tech\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3001"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}