Mark Zuckerberg's answer to 'fake news' is this garbage 2-question survey
Mark Zuckerberg is here to save us from Mark Zuckerberg.
On Tuesday, just four days after the Facebook CEO announced his intention to revamp the News Feed in favor of "high quality content," we were gifted a sneak peek at the means by which he will deliver us from the scourge of so-called fake news.
It takes the form of a survey, and, sadly, we regret to inform you that things aren't looking so good.
In a 464-word decree, the Zuck promised his disciples that the power to decide what is right and true shall henceforth be in their hands. You see, it will be up to them — the very same people who believed the Pope endorsed Donald Trump — to determine what news sources are to be trusted.
There are real stakes here, as publications that Facebook deems "trustworthy" will be prioritized on the site.
Publications that Facebook deems "trustworthy" will be prioritized on the site.
And just how are Facebook users going to communicate their well-informed and totally based-in-reality opinions about, say, InfoWars, to the Facebook product teams? Why that would be by filling out a 2-question survey.
Published by BuzzFeed News (and confirmed to Mashable by a Facebook spokesperson as authentic), the survey is perhaps meant to inspire confidence in its simplicity.
Does it succeed in that aim? We'll let you be the judge.
Here is the survey that could profoundly alter the news landscape for 2 billion people, in its entirety:
“Do you recognize the following websites?” (Yes/No)
“How much do you trust each of these domains?” (Entirely/A lot/Somewhat/Barely/Not at all).
And there you have it. The two questions that, like some sort of protective incantation, are to be asked over and over again to credulous Facebook denizens across the land. They are meant to help save us from the blight of misinformation, and the associated illnesses that come with it.
Importantly, not everyone will get a chance to weigh in. Facebook plans to survey a random sample of users, and believes that its methodology will withstand attempts by ideologically biased individuals to manipulate the process.
Which, if the company is half as successful in doing that as it was at stopping the spread of "fake news" in the lead up to the 2016 presidential election we should be in good hands. Oh, wait.
