Althouse: "Why is Slate acting like the suppression of this ThinkProgress article is a shocking aberration that’s all the Weekly Standard’s fault?"

September 12, 2018

"Why is Slate acting like the suppression of this ThinkProgress article is a shocking aberration that’s all the Weekly Standard’s fault?"

"Facebook should give up on the inevitably subjective task of policing 'fake news,' and simply let us, the users, decide for ourselves what news is credible."

Writes John, at Facebook, linking to "When Fact-Checking Becomes Censorship/Facebook has empowered a conservative magazine to suppress liberal viewpoints" (Slate).

28 comments:

Darrell said...: the Associated Press, Factcheck.org, PolitiFact, and Snopes—are widely trusted and nonpartisan

Right.; 9/12/18, 3:41 PM
Mike Sylwester said...: If Facebook censures articles, people will just go read the articles on MySpace.; 9/12/18, 3:42 PM
Mike Sylwester said...: Whenever I want to read some nonpartisan articles, I always go read Associated Press.; 9/12/18, 3:46 PM
Rick said...: Apparently Slate (Et al.) believes a 4 to 1 numerical superiority still leaves the left at a disadvantage. Some people just can't be satisfied.; 9/12/18, 3:57 PM
rehajm said...: Is there any more ill suited name for a task than fact-checking? Even WaPo makes a point to disclose their fact checking is political commentary (if you look for it)...

My first belief is since Facebook's a private entity they should be free to manipulate and propagandize any way they choose, but historically that's not the relationship we've had between the US government and monopolistic behemoth corporations.; 9/12/18, 4:00 PM
Kevin said...: Suppression for thee, but not for me?

And they call Trump "totalitarian"...; 9/12/18, 4:00 PM
Ken B said...: It's about who has the right to question, and who does not. Nor may untouchables make eye contact.; 9/12/18, 4:09 PM
Richard Dolan said...: Fact checking, as practiced in Silicon Valley, is a country cousin of civility bullshit, and used for the same purposes.; 9/12/18, 4:13 PM
Real American said...: remember, this isn't just about protecting snowflakes, it's about controlling information.; 9/12/18, 4:16 PM
Rick said...: Facebook launched fact-checking to screen out bona fide fake news—stories about the pope endorsing Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton having Parkinson’s disease. Millhiser’s story plainly falls outside this limited scope.

Here is the core issue although Stern misses the point entirely because he's only interested in supporting Team Blue. The Fake News mantra was based on attacking nonsense stories but it was immediately hijacked to attack conservatives with the full support of Stern, Slate, and the entire left-media and political apparatus.

Only now that the left is being similarly impacted do they belatedly care that fact-checkers usually aren't validating facts but opining on the implications of the facts. As we see with Title IX and MeToo only when the rules are applied to the left do they begin to care about whether they are just.; 9/12/18, 4:20 PM
PM said...: If you cut out all the horseshit AP articles that appear daily in the SF Chronicle, its news section would look like a $10,000 runway dress at NY's Fashion Week.; 9/12/18, 4:24 PM
Gunner said...: I remember Larimore as one of three employees of Slate saying she would vote for Bush in 04. I just looked at the piece and apparently she was for gay marriage even back then. Just goes to show how "conservative" Weekly Standard is.; 9/12/18, 4:27 PM
Chuck said...: My problem, with all of the hand-wringing over Facebook and Twitter is that I could not care less, about Facebook and Twitter. They could censor everything, or nothing, and it would not matter to me. I suppose that in the meantime, they will just make some bad law, as monopolies so often do.; 9/12/18, 4:27 PM
Michael K said...: Facebook may not be as secure as they seem.

These are vapor ware. They don't make anything. They are conveniences. Not necessities, like cars and electricity.

California is determined to do away with electricity anyway.; 9/12/18, 4:40 PM
Paul Zrimsek said...: File it next to gerrymandering and judicial review in the "Pre-existing but newly problematical practice found benefiting conservatives" category.; 9/12/18, 4:41 PM
Darrell said...: The objection is to the headline.
Change the headline. Or add a question mark at the end. "Did Kavanaugh just say. . .?"; 9/12/18, 4:46 PM
gilbar said...: "since Facebook's a private entity they should be free to manipulate and propagandize any way they choose, but historically that's not the relationship we've had between the US government and monopolistic behemoth corporations."

monopolistic behemoth corporations, like Bakeries?; 9/12/18, 4:48 PM
n.n said...: apparently she was for gay marriage even back then. Just goes to show how "conservative" Weekly Standard is

Conservatives and libertarians (i.e. center and right, respectively) supported civil unions for all consenting adults. This is contrary to the transgender/homosexual elite (e.g. Ellen), the progressive and liberal sects of the Pro-Choice Church, and Obama and the DNC that established political congruence ("=") or selective exclusion under the left's Twilight Amendment.; 9/12/18, 4:53 PM
FullMoon said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 9/12/18, 5:18 PM
buwaya said...: " is that I could not care less, about Facebook and Twitter."

This is an interesting comment. It says something about the nature of the writer, as an analyst. One must approach these things as phenomena independent of ones own use or value. If other people use or value them, in sufficient number, then they matter whatever our opinions, and they must be taken into account.

One could for instance retreat into ones library and eschew the newspapers, but odds are all those dull people who read the newspapers will intrude into your library after all.; 9/12/18, 5:54 PM
rcocean said...: This is just Slate attacking the Liberals at Facebook for letting down the "Team".

Only Conservatives are to be censored.; 9/12/18, 6:10 PM
Bruce Hayden said...: So, today GreatAwakening was shut down taking out maybe the safest way to get Q posts, and while doing so, the archives went too. Luckily maybe Q warned of this a couple days ago, and is apparently still available on 4chan and 8chan. We had another famous deplatforming a couple days ago, and right before that Trump TV on YouTube was deleted, again with all of its archive. This is not accidental, nor is it, I think, coincidental - we are going into a contentious, very Important, election, and all the stops are being pulled out. You can pretty well guarantee that if the Republicans retain control of Congress, there will be searching investigations into these megatech companies, that are so blatantly using their monopoly positions for partisan political advantage. But it is going to be hard, because Google has, in the past, alone put essentially as many lobbyists on the Hill, as there are members of Congress. Throw in Amazon, Apple, and Microsoft, and the financial juggernaut is likely going to be almost i,possible to corral.; 9/12/18, 7:02 PM
Larry J said...: “ Rick said...
Apparently Slate (Et al.) believes a 4 to 1 numerical superiority still leaves the left at a disadvantage. Some people just can't be satisfied.”

Their ideas are so weak that they can stand the competition even with a 4 to 1 advantage.; 9/12/18, 7:59 PM
I Have Misplaced My Pants said...: Throw in Amazon, Apple, and Microsoft, and the financial juggernaut is likely going to be almost i,possible to corral.

Not Amazon. Bezos is not an ideologue or a lefty. He just wants grow Amazon into the world's sole retailer. He does not place coins on the SJW altar like the rest of them do to appease their success guilt. He doesn't have any success guilt.; 9/12/18, 10:56 PM
The Crack Emcee said...: "Facebook has empowered a conservative magazine to suppress liberal viewpoints"

Didn't I say banning Alex Jones and InfoWars would lead conservatives to look at Gwyneth Paltrow and GOOP?; 9/13/18, 7:25 AM
Lloyd W. Robertson said...: In the specific Kavanaugh case: it is a reasonable inference, from various statements he has made, that Kavanaugh thinks if he had been on the Court for Roe in 1973, and even Casey in 1992, he would have voted no. There was no long-standing tradition to support the "unenumerated right" to an abortion, so the reasoning of the Glucksberg case (the putative new, unenumerated right to assisted suicide) would apply. On the other hand, Kavanaugh keeps saying that in 2018 he regards Roe as an accepted precedent--something like a long tradition is in effect; the question when life begins is a metaphysical one, not to be decided by courts, etc. So: Kavanaugh didn't "say" he would vote to repeal Roe and Casey. He left a clear implication that he might do so, depending on the circumstances.; 9/13/18, 8:04 AM
Tina Trent said...: Politifact is trusted and nonpartisan?

Funded by Soros through the deeply leftist, pseudo-nonprofit Poynter Institute, Politifact specializes in hatefully racializing every aspect of the media industry and lying about crime.

Poynter's abuse of victims of crime is notorious. They frequently publish articles castigating white female victims of murder and rape. It's a bizarre fetish of one of their editors.

They also routinely violate tax laws with political adcocacy not permitted under their status. They should be investigated by the IRS.

Maybe this is the new definition of nonpartisan.; 9/13/18, 9:38 AM
Rigelsen said...: Not Amazon. Bezos is not an ideologue or a lefty. He just wants grow Amazon into the world's sole retailer.

If that were only true. Amazon uses the SPLC to determine who can use their Affiliate program. Legal Insurrection was kicked out of the program either early this year or last year because of it. They are kicking out anybody who runs afoul of the SPLC. I’d guess they similarly restrict their Smile program only to causes not threatening to the leftist world view.; 9/13/18, 12:18 PM