Introduction
Since President Trump was elected as American president, the phrase "Fake News" has gained popularity. Since his election, President Trump has repeatedly accused the local press of spreading false information, but is this really the case? Many Internet users generate income by publishing false news. (Ohlheiser). The flow of breaking news and website traffic both affect the fake news authors' income. One of the major channels used by the creators of fake news to disseminate their stories is Facebook. Facebook declared that it would enhance its features to assist users in identifying false news after realizing this. However, Facebook should not do fact-checking on the basis of the following three reasons. The nature of their business, concerns of the third party company doing fact checking and lastly defending the freedom of the press (Lessin).
Facebook's Business Nature and Freedom of the Press
Facebook aims at connecting people around the world through sharing as it is a space for entertaining and sharing interests through networking that allows people to freely comment or participate in a social discussion. Checking Newsfeed update and sharing has become a part of people's lives. However, fact-checking seems to be narrowing people's interests and defending the right of people (Cohen). The reason here being that Facebook monitoring the information and the sources, the freedom of speech and creativity is being destroyed. Facebook is breaking their promise to the normal public because they are not a common social press company as the "News" or story on Newsfeed is not supposed to be monitored or officially true.
Concerns with Third-Party Fact-Checking Companies
The third-party fact-checking company cannot be trusted. According to Lessin, if Facebook would hire the third party company to check the fake news then, there would be a rise up of several social concerns for the fact-checking company (Lessin). The first concern is that no one knows if the fact-checking company holds any bios on fact checking. Since the fact-checker is a human being, it is difficult to ensure that the editors won't involve any political views or personal opinion in decision-making. The second concern is about the clarification of fact-checking. Since the flow of online information is really fast and the information contains over millions a day, the company usually goes wrong in identifying the news (Lessin). Furthermore, Facebook is a profit company and their income depends on the number of advertisements on their websites. However, the company cannot be able to guarantee that they do good monitoring regardless of money. "If they are successful in stopping fake-news from profiting, Horner told us, the effect would be devastating for his company" (Ohlheiser). The third concern is privacy concerns. The third-party company may be overpowered to work with the fake news because they may access the private information of users such as private messages or group discussion (Lessin).
The Impact on Journalism and Press Freedom
It is expected that the value of journalism will break apart if Facebook does filtering news. There are a lot of people reading news through Facebook's page in recent years. Therefore, more and more public media would create a page for the readers in order to get more social attention (Martinez). If Facebook needs the articles to fulfill certain standards, no one would trust the social press again as people would tend to believe everything is fact-checked. The news source would only come through the site endorsed standards with the subject range expected to be narrowed and restricted as the press is no longer trustworthy, hence requiring them to be fallen in a long run (Lessin).
Facebook as a Second White House for Press Freedom
To compare the past few U.S. presidents, the current relationship between the White House and the Press is considered the worst we have ever seen. In the past few weeks, the White House even stopped inviting the public press companies like New York Times, Los Angeles Times, and Washington Post to do reporting in the news interview. Facebook seems to be becoming the second White House to defend the freedom of Press (Torry). Such fact-checking activity is like a tool of brainwashing for the public that sends out a message that the service of Facebook is changed. Since Facebook would hire the editor to monitor, it also brings out different public concerns. For instance, the third company would not be fair enough on fact checking because the advertisement is the main income source for Facebook. Also, Facebook may trade the private information to the third-party company as the personal information would be included in a trade. As a result, users should be aware of the risk of their privacy leaking. In addition, the freedom of journalism will be limited, as the press needs to live off with Facebook's monitor.
Works Cited
Cohen, Roger. "Am I Imagining This?" The New York Times. The New York Times, 10 Feb. 2017. Web. 12 Mar. 2017.
Lessin, Jessica. "Facebook Shouldn't Fact-Check." The New York Times. The New York Times, 29 Nov. 2016. Web. 12 Mar. 2017.
Martinez-Conde, Susana, and Stephen L. Macknik. "The Delusion of Alternative Facts." Scientific American Blog Network. Nature American Inc., 27 Jan. 2017. Web. 12 Mar. 2017.
Ohlheiser, Abby. "Analysis | This is how Facebook’s fake-news writers make money." The Washington Post. WP Company, 18 Nov. 2016. Web. 12 Mar. 2017.
Torry, Harriet, Andrew Ackerman, and Carol E. Lee. "White House Backs 'Alternative Facts'." The Wall Street Journal. Dow Jones & Company, 22 Jan. 2017. Web. 12 Mar. 2017.
