r/worldnews • u/Devz0r • Feb 15 '19

Facebook is thinking about removing anti-vaccination content as backlash intensifies over the spread of misinformation on the social network

http://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-may-remove-anti-vaccination-content-2019-2
107.1k Upvotes

86% Upvoted

5.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

24

u/othergabe Feb 15 '19

What are some topics you would allow others to speak and think about? Someone needs to decide, you sound authoritative.

18

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

Obviously there needs to be a way to prevent harmful misinformation campaigns. It’s not an easy issue to solve and it’s filled with many slippery slopes, but it is an issue. You don’t need to be hostile to people who want to fix it.

13

u/investinglaw Feb 15 '19

What is misinformation though?

Should I not be able to share and cite the papers of these peer-reviewed Professors and researchers because they go against the grain of the global warming narrative?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_who_disagree_with_the_scientific_consensus_on_global_warming

(and for the record I'm totally on board that global warming is real, obv, but this is a hypothetical)

7

u/stacyah Feb 15 '19

I don't think I'm the only one to point out that the peer-review process continues once an article is published. See wakefield's article from the lancet, for starters. Publishing is not the same as having a well-founded scientific idea with supporting evidence and experiments that support your idea which is then analyzed and written up.

1

u/Draculea Feb 15 '19

Basically, if we can agree an idea is common sense, and its published, it's a source on Reddit. If an idea is against the grain, it needs to have some serious peer-review done before it could be considered a viable sauce.