General Discussion

ColemanMaskell

(783 posts)

82. Maybe using an alert or warning would be better than blocking

Mon Mar 27, 2017, 11:09 PM

Mar 2017

Similar to the new Facebook approach, but simpler. It's easier to keep track of a list of sources (like BipartisanReport) than to try to keep track of individual bogus stories (as Facebook apparently plans to do).

There are problems inherent in blocking selected sources, as with any censorship.

I'd rather see a warning given to any person posting such a link, at the time of posting, and if they want to continue in spite of the warning then let them, but add another warning that would appear along with the post, ideally something that would also appear in the list next to the title.

For that matter, I'd like to see a warning appear in the list when the only thing that a post contains is a link with little or no accompanying explanatory text.

The warnings wouldn't have to take up a lot of space, they could be icon-like, emoji-like symbols. The radioactivity symbol would do. Or a stoplight icon, showing either red or the yellow flashing caution signal.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

90 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Should DU have an alert or policy for posts with suspected fake news sources? [View all] Quixote1818 Mar 2017 OP

I say yes ProudLib72 Mar 2017 #1

Is there a way to put a disclaimer adjacent to the site's header or sidebar? Jonny Appleseed Mar 2017 #2

As long as they have links to back up their opinions, I'm fine with them. Raine1967 Mar 2017 #3

This one IS fakenews. Ms. Toad Mar 2017 #7

Bingo ColemanMaskell Mar 2017 #45

Absolutely. We are adults . nocalflea Mar 2017 #29

Why shoudnt the OP be held responsible? MichMan Mar 2017 #60

no, we're terrible unfortunately BuddyCa Mar 2017 #81

The admins need to be the ones to stop it. nocalflea Mar 2017 #87

Absolutely. Ms. Toad Mar 2017 #4

I agree. cwydro Mar 2017 #25

I would like a place I can trust that provides real news. LiberalFighter Mar 2017 #55

Just leave it alone. democratisphere Mar 2017 #5

Looks like the one tonight certanly got flushed out. The OP just deleted it after around 60 recs. Quixote1818 Mar 2017 #6

Finally. n/t Ms. Toad Mar 2017 #10

We should all be responsible for anything we read here at DU, ESP in GD. Raine1967 Mar 2017 #8

And responsible for what we post nm MichMan Mar 2017 #61

I think that would be a good idea... Ellipsis Mar 2017 #9

Yes, SOMETHING. elleng Mar 2017 #11

If right wing conspiracy loon Louise Mensch is considered a valid source anything goes, IMO. nt m-lekktor Mar 2017 #12

Actually Louise Mensch has been right on and seems to have some great intelligence sources womanofthehills Mar 2017 #40

only conservatives can bring down Trump at this point. Unless you want to wait til 2018. n/t yodermon Mar 2017 #62

Link to an extensive list of fake (and satire) new sites ColemanMaskell Mar 2017 #13

you do note DU is on that list as well? colored bars but no legend? Just seems like a random NRaleighLiberal Mar 2017 #14

I find the fact check site idea interesting but defacto7 Mar 2017 #22

No legend is annoying as hell Warpy Mar 2017 #26

Click the arrowhead > at the right to go to a write-up of details. DU's write-up is mostly fair ColemanMaskell Mar 2017 #43

So Common Dreams, Alternet and Daily Kos are fake news sites according to this list womanofthehills Mar 2017 #42

They're unreliable compared to NYT, WaPo, and Newsweek standards. Yes. That's what is being said. ColemanMaskell Mar 2017 #44

I wish that everyone who recced the other thread would rec this one. n/t Crunchy Frog Mar 2017 #15

Should be alerted on Control-Z Mar 2017 #16

I like that idea.n/t Ms. Toad Mar 2017 #32

everyone knows all tweets are true and worth reading nt msongs Mar 2017 #17

I would like to see known fake news and clickbait sites auto-banned from here. Lisa0825 Mar 2017 #18

Maybe using an alert or warning would be better than blocking ColemanMaskell Mar 2017 #82

Pass your OP on over to Ask the Admins so they can consider it. Hekate Mar 2017 #19

Someone posted a fake twitter site for Loretta Lynch LeftInTX Mar 2017 #20

I think we get too "persnickity" sometimes sarah FAILIN Mar 2017 #21

There is not only no value in fake news, it is harmful, Ms. Toad Mar 2017 #34

I guess I didn't communicate that as intended sarah FAILIN Mar 2017 #37

If the news item is objectively false, the post ought to be hidden. Ms. Toad Mar 2017 #64

Maybe I misunderstand the post then. sarah FAILIN Mar 2017 #74

The OP was perhaps overly broad - Ms. Toad Mar 2017 #83

I admit I have fallen for fake news a few times... defacto7 Mar 2017 #23

I would like to see something like this, but not sure how to implement it. Stonepounder Mar 2017 #24

And we generally like Borowitz here - and The Onion. Rhiannon12866 Mar 2017 #77

Throw it by ATA. Perhaps the TOS: Don't peddle right-wing talking points, smears, or sources still_one Mar 2017 #27

The one that triggered this had a liberal bias. N/t Ms. Toad Mar 2017 #36

Thanks, but I don't need spoon feeding. LOL Lib Mar 2017 #28

We have TOS, the alert system, and MIRT for a reason.... Hekate Mar 2017 #58

Yes. BainsBane Mar 2017 #30

This is the kind of thing to ask in ATA (Ask the Administrators.) pnwmom Mar 2017 #31

NO, it is not always easy to tell Demsrule86 Mar 2017 #33

Good luck. Discussionist is basically a fake news generator at this point. JTFrog Mar 2017 #35

One member's fake news is another member's reliable source. Kaleva Mar 2017 #38

Can we alert on vapid "Link to Tweet" posts? Orrex Mar 2017 #39

"Link to Tweet" posts now load as the actual tweet. yallerdawg Mar 2017 #46

That never works for me. Orrex Mar 2017 #47

Does this tweet come up for you? yallerdawg Mar 2017 #48

Right now I'm at work, so the filters block them Orrex Mar 2017 #49

We always think everyone sees what each of us sees on our variety of "devices." yallerdawg Mar 2017 #52

Right? Orrex Mar 2017 #54

Or those tallahasseedem Mar 2017 #41

By whose standard? hunter Mar 2017 #50

Yes gopiscrap Mar 2017 #51

If we had dedicated moderators, I think maybe it'd be a good idea. Iggo Mar 2017 #53

Mainstream, corporate news is never fake? Iraq War anyone? jalan48 Mar 2017 #56

Yes, and the same with fake popularity polls. nt R B Garr Mar 2017 #57

Yes, I do hope someone respectfully asks Skinner to consider this. KittyWampus Mar 2017 #59

LBN should show source on thread title page, I would ignore many if they did and not waste my time! FreeStateDemocrat Mar 2017 #63

The problem with the links you posted is that synergie Mar 2017 #65

That's good about "Breaking News" thread, it disallows commentary articles ColemanMaskell Mar 2017 #69

That's the benefit of being a liberal site :-) synergie Mar 2017 #72

Seriously? Ms. Toad Mar 2017 #73

I've never found either source to be terribly credible. synergie Mar 2017 #84

You responded to the OP with the comment, "Neither of those sites are 'fake news'" Ms. Toad Mar 2017 #85

Right, my point was that they're not fake news because they're not news sites. synergie Mar 2017 #86

That's not now "neither of those" is usually interpreted when it precedes all those other words. nt Ms. Toad Mar 2017 #89

Generally, when there are paragraphs, it's helpful to read them and understand what they all mean. synergie Mar 2017 #90

Message auto-removed Name removed Mar 2017 #66

How easy is it to spot "Fake News" if you don't consider the source(the site) ? ColemanMaskell Mar 2017 #67

Second example of jarring similarity ColemanMaskell Mar 2017 #68

Palmer Report isn't "fake news" Chitown Kev Mar 2017 #70

Agreed - and everytime I post something from the Palmer Report, someone goes crazy womanofthehills Mar 2017 #75

The list is imperfect, certainly. I leaves off The National Enquirer, for example. ColemanMaskell Mar 2017 #80

Furthermore, even if there is a right wing bias Chitown Kev Mar 2017 #71

I think that's covered under "extremist and hate content" sources Rhiannon12866 Mar 2017 #76

Yes... LovingA2andMI Mar 2017 #78

Bipartisan Report should be banned now BuddyCa Mar 2017 #79

Yes - the reply button. Hassin Bin Sober Mar 2017 #88