By Jeff Horwitz
Facebook Inc. plans to exempt opinion pieces and satire from its
fact-checking program, according to people familiar with the
matter, as the social-media giant grapples with how to stop the
spread of falsehoods while maintaining its own neutrality.
As part of the new rules, Facebook will allow publishers of
information found to be false by outside fact checkers to appeal to
the company, said the people familiar with the changes. Posts that
Facebook deems to be either opinion or satire won't be labeled as
false even if they contain information the fact checkers determined
was inaccurate, the people said.
The new rules follow Facebook's acknowledgment last week that it
will continue exempting politicians from fact-checks on the grounds
that such comments are newsworthy, as well as a recent controversy
arising from a third-party fact checker's determination that an
antiabortion group's video was false.
The rules, which haven't been announced, coincide with
Facebook's decision last week to remove a false designation from a
Washington Examiner opinion piece, overriding the conclusion of one
of its fact-check partners. That op-ed argued that global-warming
climate models have been inaccurate and that the risks of climate
change are overblown.
The removal of the false label was celebrated by the CO2
Coalition, which employs the op-ed's authors and had argued in a
letter to Facebook that the company "used a partisan fact-check
group to defame them." The group, which receives funding from
individuals and organizations with ties to the oil-and-gas
industry, is skeptical that global warming is having catastrophic
effects and advocates for the "important contribution made by
carbon dioxide to our lives and the economy."
A Facebook spokeswoman didn't respond to requests for comment on
the new rules.
Together, the changes demonstrate the company's continuing
struggle to limit the spread of so-called fake news and other
misinformation without being accused of stifling free speech.
"I know Facebook doesn't want to be in the middle of this, but
here they are," said Angie Drobnic Holan, the editor of PolitiFact
and a member of the board of the International Fact-Checking
Network, which accredits Facebook's fact-checking partners.
Ms. Holan said she expected that the changes as described would
only affect the overall fact-checking program at the margins, but
noted that publishers of false statements have a history of arguing
that they are opinions.
"There are cases where the line between fact and opinion are not
as bright as you might think," she said.
Other fact checkers have noted similarly slippery boundaries
between fact and satire.
Rappler, a Manila-based news outlet that fact-checks Facebook
content in the Philippines, has documented bad-faith publishers
dressing up false stories as satire. If such a dodge is allowed,
Rappler wrote last year, "purveyors of fake news will now be able
to escape accountability by simply labeling their stories as
satire, no matter the intention, how badly written they are, how
many clues they use to overrationalize, or even if they disregard
every rule of satire."
Facebook's fact-checking program has become a central piece of
the company's response to misinformation since its unveiling in
late 2016.
Fact-checking groups choose what content to review, and material
deemed false or partially false carries a warning and is
distributed by Facebook's algorithms to fewer people.
The program is limited to just over 50 groups world-wide, many
of which receive funding from Facebook.
The recent controversy over the fact-checking of antiabortion
organization Live Action illustrates the stakes. In a video
distributed on Facebook, Live Action said that abortion is never
medically necessary.
Science Feedback, a French nonprofit that was approved as a
Facebook fact-checking partner earlier this year, labeled the claim
false. Though Science Feedback's conclusion was in line with
medical literature and the primary professional association for
obstetricians and gynecologists, Live Action alleged that the
doctors who had consulted on the fact check were biased by their
affiliation with abortion-rights organizations.
Live Action accused Facebook of suppressing debate, and the
complaint was widely circulated in conservative media and
eventually drew the support of Republican Sens. Ted Cruz and Josh
Hawley.
Facebook removed the false designation from Live Action's video,
pending an investigation by the International Fact-Checking Network
about whether Science Feedback's actions were appropriate. On
Friday, the IFCN said it stood by Science Feedback's process and
determination.
As of Monday afternoon, Facebook hadn't restored the designation
of Live Action's video as false. The company also didn't
immediately respond to questions about whether the statement that
abortion is never medically necessary might be classified as
opinion.
A Live Action representative didn't immediately respond to a
request for comment.
Facebook's fact-checking program has been panned by critics, and
some partners have reported frustration over the limited tools
provided to them.
Yet both fact checkers and the company have of late said the
program is improving.
"I really appreciate that Facebook works with us to help find
hoax content," said Ms. Holan.
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
October 10, 2019 16:36 ET (20:36 GMT)
Copyright (c) 2019 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
Meta Platforms (NASDAQ:META)
Historical Stock Chart
From Apr 2024 to May 2024
Meta Platforms (NASDAQ:META)
Historical Stock Chart
From May 2023 to May 2024