언론과 소셜 미디어 공간에서 '진실 보도'와 '거짓 정보 여과' 기능이 더욱더 중요해지다.
마크 주커버그의 핵심 주장은 '언론의 자유'를 위해 소셜 미디어에서 '사실 검토' 기능을 없앤다. 그러니 개인 사용자끼리 서로 '사실 정정'을 하라고 함. 이러한 주커버그의 '사실 검토 기능 폐지'에 대해, 필리핀 언론인, 노벨상 수상자인 마리아 레사는, 거짓말, 혐오, 분노, 공포의 말들이 플랫폼에서 난무할 것을 우려했다.
주커버그 방침은 온라인 공간에서 '만인에 대한 만인의 투쟁'을 방치할 수 있다.
영국 가디언이 '메타' 회사 주커버그의 '사실 검토 기능' 폐지 정책의 문제점을 다음과 같이 지적함.
-----------------------------------------------------------
틀린 정보, 부정확한 정보, 허위 정보가 많은 위험한 시대에 살고 있다. 소셜 미디어가 이를 더 부추기도 한다.
메타 회장, 마크 주커버그 발표문. 소셜 미디어 플랫폼 (페이스북, 인스타그램, 쓰레즈)은 '모든 사실 검토기'를 다 제거할 것이라고 발표.
주커버그의 문제점 - 온라인 공간에서 '진실,진리' 찾기가 더 힘들게 될 것이다.
UK (영국) 성인 절반 이상이 소셜 미디어를 통해 뉴스를 접하고 있고, 젊은층 비율은 더 많은 상황.
영국에서 페이스북, 인스타그램, X은 10대 뉴스 공급처들에 속한다.
주커버그 입장, 메타도 엘론 머스크의 'X' 지침을 따를 것이고, 사용자의 텍스트-노트의 편의를 위해, 잘못된 내용에 대한 제 3자의 검토를 배제할 것이다.
노벨상 수상자이자 필리핀 언론인, 마리아 레사 (Maria Ressa)의 주장, 메타의 정책변화는 우리를 "사실 없는 세계"로 이끌어 갈 것이라고 비판.
지난 주에 소셜 미디어에서 일론 머스크가 영국에서 선출된 공무원들을 공격하고 잘못된 정보를 뿌렸다.
가디언의 주장, 허위정보는 유권자들이 거짓을 믿게 만들 수 있고, 믿지 않는 사람들을 싫어하게 만들 수 있는 '강력한 정치적 무기'이다.
부정확하고 틀린 정보와 거짓정보를 막기 위해서, 가디언의 부지런한 기자들과 편집자들은 사실을 전달하고, 진실을 보도하기 위해 온 힘을 다 기울이고 있다.
'가디언'은 이러한 사실과 진실보도의 사명에 공명하는 독자의 지원으로 운영되는 '독립 기구'이다.
We live in a dangerous age of misinformation and disinformation. One that is often fuelled by social media.
On Tuesday, Meta’s CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, announced that his social media platforms – including Facebook, Instagram and Threads – would get rid of all factcheckers.
Meta’s move could make the truth even harder to find online.
In the UK, more than half of adults use social media to get their news. The number is even higher for young people. Facebook, Instagram and Elon Musk’s X make up three of the 10 biggest sources for news in the country.
Meta has said it will follow the lead of X and move away from third-party checks of misleading content in favour of user-based notes. Nobel prize-winning journalist Maria Ressa said Meta’s change in policy would lead to a “world without facts”.
Meanwhile, Musk himself, the planet’s richest man, has spent the past week using his enormous profile on his social media site to attack and spread falsehoods about elected officials in the UK.
Disinformation, as a Guardian editorial put it this week, is a “potent political weapon” that can make “voters believe falsehoods while distrusting – even hating – those who don’t”.
In the face of this wave of misinformation and disinformation, the Guardian’s diligent reporters and editors are committed to standing up for facts and reporting the truth. We are an independent organisation powered by the support of readers who share with us in this urgent mission.
2. 마크 주커버그 주장.
언론 자유를 위해서 그런 조치를 내렸다.
Meta to get rid of factcheckers and recommend more political content
Mark Zuckerberg says company will ‘dramatically reduce censorship’ across Facebook, Instagram and Threads
Robert Booth UK technology editor
Tue 7 Jan 2025 13.43 GMT
Share
Meta will get rid of factcheckers, “dramatically reduce the amount of censorship” and recommend more political content on its platforms, including Facebook, Instagram and Threads, founder Mark Zuckerberg has announced.
In a video message, Zuckerberg vowed to prioritise free speech after the return of Donald Trump to the White House and said that, starting in the US, he would “get rid of factcheckers and replace them with community notes similar to X”.
X, the social media platform owned by Elon Musk, relies on other users to add caveats and context to contentious posts.
Zuckerberg said Meta’s “factcheckers have just been too politically biased and have destroyed more trust than they’ve created”.
The tech firm’s content moderation teams will be moved from California to Texas “where there is less concern about the bias of our teams”, he said. He admitted that changes to the way Meta filters content would mean “we’re going to catch less bad stuff”.
Meta logo is seen on a phone screen
Meta claims news is not an antidote to misinformation on its platforms
Meta has more than 3 billion users globally. In a wide-ranging statement, Zuckerberg said Meta would also “get rid of a bunch of restrictions on topics like immigration and gender that are just out of touch with mainstream discourse” and “work with President Trump to push back on governments around the world that are going after American companies and pushing to censor more”.
He cited Europe as a place with “an ever increasing number of laws institutionalising censorship and making it difficult to build anything innovative” and said: “Latin American countries have secret courts that can order companies to quietly take things down.”
Zuckerberg, 40, framed the decision to get rid of factcheckers as a return to an argument in favour of freedom of expression that he made at Georgetown University in October 2019. He said November’s US presidential election felt like “a cultural tipping point towards, once again, prioritising speech”.
The announcement comes days after Nick Clegg, the former UK deputy prime minister, announced he was stepping down as Meta’s president of global affairs to be replaced by the prominent Republican Joel Kaplan.
Meta’s oversight board, co-chaired by figures including the former prime minister of Denmark Helle Thorning-Schmidt, responded to the announcement of what is effectively a crowd-sourced approach to factchecking with a statement that said: “We look forward to working with Meta in the coming weeks to understand the changes in greater detail, ensuring its new approach can be as effective and speech-friendly as possible.”
It welcomed the announcement that Meta would revise its approach to factchecking, but said: “It is essential that decisions on content are taken with maximum input from voices outside of Meta, including of the people who use its platforms every day.”
It concluded: “We would also like to take this opportunity to thank Nick Clegg who, as president of global affairs at Meta, was instrumental in overseeing the creation of the oversight board and has been a strong advocate for freedom of speech on Meta’s platforms. We look forward to Joel Kaplan’s leadership in continuing this important work.”
In his five-minute statement, Zuckerberg said: “Governments and legacy media have pushed to censor more and more. A lot of this is clearly political, but there’s also a lot of legitimately bad stuff out there, drugs, terrorism, child exploitation. These are things that we take very seriously, and I want to make sure that we handle responsibly.
“So we built a lot of complex systems to moderate content, but the problem with complex systems is they make mistakes, even if they accidentally censor just 1% of posts, that’s millions of people, and we’ve reached a point where it’s just too many mistakes and too much censorship. The recent elections also feel like a cultural tipping point towards, once again, prioritising speech.”
He said that removing some restrictions on content on topics such as gender and immigration would “make sure that people can share their beliefs and experiences on our platforms” and he said the focus of filters that scan posts for policy violations would be shifted to only tackling illegal and high severity violations with Meta, relying on users to report lower severity violations before it takes action.
“By dialling them back, we’re going to dramatically reduce the amount of censorship on our platforms,” he said.
“We’re also going to tune our content filters to require much higher confidence before taking down content. The reality is that this is a tradeoff. It means we’re going to catch less bad stuff, but we’ll also reduce innocent people’s posts and accounts that we accidentally take down.”
The UK’s Department for Science, Innovation and Technology said: “We are looking closely at Meta’s announcement impacting its US platform.
“The UK’s Online Safety Act will oblige them to remove illegal content and content harmful to children here in the UK, and we continue to urge social media companies to counter the spread of misinformation and disinformation hosted on their platforms.”
Meta to get rid of factcheckers and recommend more political content
Mark Zuckerberg says company will ‘dramatically reduce censorship’ across Facebook, Instagram and Threads
www.theguardian.com
3.
Meta is ushering in a ‘world without facts’, says Nobel peace prize winner
Maria Ressa warns of ‘dangerous times’ for journalism and democracy after move to end factchecking in US
Dan Milmo Global technology editor
Wed 8 Jan 2025 13.42 GMT
Share
The Nobel peace prize winner Maria Ressa has said Meta’s decision to end factchecking on its platforms and remove restrictions on certain topics means “extremely dangerous times” lie ahead for journalism, democracy and social media users.
The American-Filipino journalist said Mark Zuckerberg’s move to relax content moderation on the Facebook and Instagram platforms would lead to a “world without facts” and that was “a world that’s right for a dictator”.
“Mark Zuckerberg says it’s a free speech issue – that’s completely wrong,” Ressa told the AFP news service. “Only if you’re profit-driven can you claim that; only if you want power and money can you claim that. This is about safety.”
Why did Mark Zuckerberg end Facebook and Instagram’s factchecking program?
Read more
Ressa, a co-founder of the Rappler news site, won the Nobel peace prize in 2021 in recognition of her “courageous fight for freedom of expression”. She faced multiple criminal charges and investigations after publishing stories critical of the former Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte.
Ressa rejected Zuckerberg’s claim that factcheckers had been “too politically biased” and had “destroyed more trust than they’ve created”.
“Journalists have a set of standards and ethics,” Ressa said. “What Facebook is going to do is get rid of that and then allow lies, anger, fear and hate to infect every single person on the platform.”
The decision meant “extremely dangerous times ahead” for journalism, democracy and social media users, she said.
Zuckerberg, the founder and chief executive of Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, said on Tuesday he would remove third-party factcheckers in the US and replace them with a crowd-sourced moderating service similar to the “community notes” feature on the rival social media platform X.
He added that Meta would also “get rid of a bunch of restrictions on topics like immigration and gender that are just out of touch with mainstream discourse” and “work with President Trump to push back on governments around the world that are going after American companies and pushing to censor more”.
Meta has said it has “no immediate plans” to remove factcheckers outside the US, although the rest of the changes will be implemented worldwide.
Ressa said she would do everything she could to “ensure information integrity”. “This is a pivotal year for journalism survival,” she said. “We’ll do all we can to make sure that happens.”
In October, the human rights group Amnesty International claimed that authorities in the Philippines were using Facebook to “red-tag” young activists, a term referring to the labelling of campaigners and others as alleged “communist rebels” and “terrorists”.
In 2021 a Meta whistleblower, Frances Haugen, claimed there was a lack of safety controls in non-English language markets, such as Africa and the Middle East, and that Facebook was being used by human traffickers and armed groups in Ethiopia.
“I did what I thought was necessary to save the lives of people, especially in the global south, who I think are being endangered by Facebook’s prioritisation of profits over people,” she told the Observer.
At the time, Meta, then operating under the corporate brand of Facebook, said the premise that it prioritised profit over safety was “false” and that it had invested $13bn (£11bn) in protecting users.
In 2018, after the massacre of Rohingya Muslims by the military in Myanmar, Facebook admitted that the platform had been used to “foment division and incite offline violence”. Three years later, the human rights group Global Witness claimed that Facebook was promoting content that incited violence against political protesters in Myanmar. Facebook said it had proactively detected 99% of the hate speech removed from the platform in the country.
'정치철학 > 자유(freedom)' 카테고리의 다른 글
| 칼 맑스의 비판적 사고의 기원. 참된 자유란 무엇인가? Ein Verständnis des Kapitalismus ist ohne Marx’ Kapital nicht zu haben. (2) | 2024.09.12 |
|---|---|
| 칼 맑스와 윤석열의 공통점과 차이점 - 개인의 진정한 자유란 무엇인가 (1) | 2024.04.07 |
| 윤석열의 '자유' 개념 불분명하다. '누구의' '무엇을 위한' 자유인가? 소수의 '자유'만을 말하는 윤석열의 자유 개념. (0) | 2021.06.29 |
| 자유란 무엇인가? 정치적 좌파 기본원리 - 자유 개념 (0) | 2012.06.26 |
