"Now that social media sites have your attention, they’d like to have your trust. Today LinkedIn filed a patent for a fact-checking system, in yet another sign that people are simply fed up with the internet’s lies. And social media platforms are trying to do something about it.
The patent, acquired from an inventor outside of LinkedIn, is described as a fact-checking system that compares information with one or more sources. The user is also able to interact with the information and get more context if they need it. Pretty straightforward stuff."
Patent for interactive fact-checker Linked-In just bought http://t.co/FU8lTDB5Tn http://t.co/TkTXeV9wrI
"A friend sent me an infographic from a sketchy “medical degree information website” … and I learned that sometimes, good people pass on bad Internet pages that make money for bad people."
"Figuring out what’s genuine, what’s propaganda. and what’s fake or a hoax is getting harder and harder these days, and we need more and more skeptical spectacles when taking in both texts and images."
"Nevada Assemblywoman Michele Fiore (R) wants to reform the rules of end-of-life medical care so that more cancer patients can simply flush out their disease using baking soda.
Fiore, who is also CEO of a healthcare company, told listeners to her weekly radio show on Saturday, that she will soon introduce a “terminally ill bill,” to allow more non-FDA-approved treatments for those diagnosed as having terminal illnesses.
As first reported by Jon Ralston, Fiore told listeners: “If you have cancer, which I believe is a fungus, and we can put a pic line into your body and we’re flushing, let’s say, salt water, sodium cardonate [sic], through that line, and flushing out the fungus… "
"The paper, "Computational fact checking from knowledge networks," outlines an approach to BS detection using a shortest-path problem in graph theory. First, a questionable statement is broken apart into three pieces: a subject, predicate, and an object, which might look like this: “Socrates,” “is a,” “person.”"
By the end of 2014, more than 3 billion people will have access to the Internet, which means that they (we) have the power to ask any question at any time and get a multitude of answers within a second. The responsibility for distinguishing between accurate, credible, true information and misinformation or disinformation, however, is no longer vested in trained and vetted experts — editors, publishers, critics, librarians, professors, subject-matter specialists.
Now, the enormity, ubiquity and dubious credibility of the information available to most of the world’s population is requiring each of us to become something of an expert on figuring out when we’re being misled or lied to.
RT @dmlresearchhub: Teaching #CriticalThinking in Age of Digital Credulity http://t.co/6oaUXFaK0b by @hrheingold #digitalliteracy
"On Tuesday, Facebook announced a new feature for its News Feed. Stories that Facebook believes to be untrue will be marked with a warning: Many people on Facebook have reported that this story contains false information.
True to its text, all the information that will trigger this warning comes from users. If you see a story you think is false on your friend’s wall, you can flag it as a bad post and then tell Facebook it’s a hoax. (After the menu below, Facebook will ask you if you want to privately message the poster telling them about the untrue information.)"
"Facebook announced yet another tweak to the algorithm that governs its users’ News Feeds yesterday. The social network has introduced a new tool that allows users to flag a post as “a false news story.” The move follows a few other attempts by the platform to better delineate different types of content. For example, in August, it was reported that the company was experimenting with satire tags meant to help users differentiate between parody and news. They’ve also taken steps to push back against clickbait."
MT @Digidave "What does Facebook’s new tool for fighting fake news mean for real publishers?" http://t.co/6yTGnciJVf #crapdetection
"A national poll, conducted in March for the Associated Press, found that 42 per cent of Americans are “not too” or “not at all” confident that all life on Earth is the product of evolution. Similarly, 51 per cent of people expressed skepticism that the universe started with a “big bang” 13.8 billion years ago, and 36 per cent doubted the Earth has been around for 4.5 billion years.
h/t @kegill 42% of Americans doubt evolution http://t.co/SFm0rnF5NP
"The TV personality who describes himself as “America’s doctor” has been widely delivering medical advice with zero scientific basis, according to a new study.
About half of recommendations from Dr. Mehmet Oz have “no evidence” or are flat-out contradictory to medical research, according to a study published by the British Medical Journal this week."
RT @EthanZ: Wellesley researchers find ways to distinguish true and false rumors on Twitter: https://t.co/37vUNckEIm
"The search engine giant is testing a new feature that urges people Googling illnesses or symptoms to jump on a video call with a medical professional."
A task of primary importance for social networkusers is to decide whose updates to subscribe to in order tomaximize the relevance, credibility, and quality of the informationreceived. To address this problem, we conducted an experimentdesigned to measure the extent to which different factors in onlinesocial networks affect both explicit and implicit judgments ofcredibility. The results of the study indicate that both the topicalcontent of information sources and social network structureaffect source credibility. Based on these results, we designed anovel method of automatically identifying and ranking socialnetwork users according to their relevance and expertise fora given topic. We performed empirical studies to compare avariety of alternative ranking algorithms and a proprietaryservice provided by a commercial website speciﬁcally designedfor the same purpose. Our ﬁndings show a great potential forautomatically identifying and ranking credible users for anygiven topic.
[download] Finding Credible Information Sources in SocNets
Based on Content & Social Structure - best paper award http://t.co/vJYVTyqh
"Mr. Nossiter’s first impulse, though, was a good one. And although this instance has not turned out to be a cautionary tale, it does raise questions about authenticating video images — and the difficulty of doing so — in today’s relentless, 24-hour news cycle. I explored these questions with journalists inside and outside The Times this past week.
The word that came up over and over in these half-dozen interviews was “verification.”
"According to Phys.org, the tool is called BotOrNot, and it looks over more than a thousand features from a Twitter Inc (NYSE:TWTR)’s social network, including their Twitter posts and other information. The tool provides the analysis in real time and assigns a probability on whether or not a particular Twitter account is being run by a bot.
Interestingly enough, the U.S. military and the National Science Foundation funded the research for developing the tool because they recognize that higher amounts of information flow have not only changed the way people communication, but also changed the way incorrect information spreads."
"The chart appears to scale 6 million to about one-third of the Obama administration's original goal for sign-ups through the federal and state health-insurance exchanges — 7.066 million. Fox News on Tuesday issued a correction on the chart (see update below for more).
A proper scale would probably look something more like this:"
"On any given day we're lied to from 10 to 200 times, and the clues to detect those lie can be subtle and counter-intuitive. Pamela Meyer, author of Liespotting, shows the manners and "hotspots" used by those trained to recognize deception — and she argues honesty is a value worth preserving.
Click in to find related links.