Categories
-Top News Social Media USA

‘Fake news’ flourished on Facebook during US presidential poll

According to Osborne, Facebook has fact-checkers who limit posts that include misinformation…reports Asian Lite News.

Social media posts that push misinformation, spin, lies, and deceit — otherwise known as “fake news” — generated six times more clicks, likes, shares, and interactions on Facebook compared to traditional news sources between August 2020 to January 2021, according to a study.

The forthcoming peer-reviewed study was jointly conducted by New York University and Université Grenoble Alpes in France as it focused on user behavior on Facebook around the 2020 US presidential election.

The phrase “fake news” took shape in mid-2016 during Donald Trump’s run to the presidency and essentially morphed into an angry political slur during Trump’s first term and his unsuccessful re-election campaign four years later.

Facebook is certainly not the only social media platform to benefit from the exploration of “fake news” as the phrase has quickly become part of America’s lexicon.

“This report looks mostly at how people engage with content, which should not be confused with how many people actually see it on Facebook,” Joe Osborne, company spokesman, said.

“When you look at the content that gets the most reach across Facebook, it is not at all like what this study suggests.”

However, the number of people who actually view a certain post, known as impressions, is not available to researchers or the public.

According to Osborne, Facebook has fact-checkers who limit posts that include misinformation.

In early August, Facebook reportedly shut down the personal accounts of the NYU researchers involved in the study, citing that the group was publishing academic studies about the platform at “the expense of people’s privacy.”

According to experts, however, this study will validate the criticism that Facebook’s algorithms fuel the spread of misinformation and “fake news” over more trustworthy information.

Facebook and other social media companies have recently been attempting to increase their scrutiny over misinformation and disinformation shared on the platforms. In August, Facebook announced it had dismantled 53 accounts and 51 pages sharing misinformation on its site.

The multinational technology company, based in Menlo Park, Calif., was founded in 2004 by Mark Zuckerberg and four other students at Harvard College. Today Zuckerberg serves as the CEO, chairman, and controlling shareholder of Facebook.

“It is clear now that we did not do enough to prevent these tools from being used for harm as well,” Zuckerberg said when he testified before a joint US Senate Committee nearly two years before the 2020 presidential election.

“That goes for fake news, foreign interference in elections, and hate speech, as well as developers and data privacy. We did not take a broad enough view of our responsibility, and that was a big mistake. It was my mistake, and I am sorry. I started Facebook, I run it, and I am responsible for what happens here.”

ALSO READ-Facebook hits back at Biden on vaccinations

Categories
-Top News India News Social Media

SC says Facebook has potential to polarise public debate

The bench held that for intermediaries to say that they can sidestep this criticism is a fallacy, as they are right in the centre of these debates…reports Asian Lite News.

The Supreme Court on Thursday said Facebook has the “power of not simply a hand but a fist, gloved as it may be”, as these platforms employ business models having potential to polarise public debates.

A bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Dinesh Maheshwari and Hrishikesh Roy said: “These platforms are by no means altruistic in character but rather employ business models that can be highly privacy intrusive and have the potential to polarise public debates.

“Facebook has the power of not simply a hand but a fist, gloved as it may be.”

These platforms have become power centres themselves, having the ability to influence vast sections of opinions, it added.

The bench observed that developments around the world reflect rising concerns across borders. “The concern is whether the liberal debate which these platforms profess to encourage has itself become a casualty,” it said in its 188-page judgment.

The bench held that for intermediaries to say that they can sidestep this criticism is a fallacy, as they are right in the centre of these debates.

“It has to be noted that their platform has also hosted disruptive voices replete with misinformation. These have had a direct impact on vast areas of subject matter which ultimately affect the governance of states,” it observed.

In this modern technological age, it would be too simplistic an intermediary like Facebook to contend that they are merely a platform for exchange of ideas without performing any significant role themselves – especially given their manner of functioning and business model, it stressed.

The bench observed that governments have expressed concern for necessity of greater accountability by these intermediaries which have become big business corporations with influence across borders and over millions of people.

It said algorithms, which are sequences of instructions, have human interventions to personalise content and influence opinions as part of the business model.

“As such, their primary objective is to subserve their business interests. It is first a business and then anything else. As per their own acknowledgement, they would only appear before any committee if it served their commercial and operational interests, as it did when they appeared before the parliamentary committee. But if their business interests are not served, they seek a right to stay away,” said the bench, stating this is completely unacceptable.

Facebook today has influence over a third population of this planet. In India, Facebook claims to be the most popular social media with 270 million registered users.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yANQhLFD2rc

The bench said the business model of intermediaries like Facebook, being one across countries, they cannot be permitted to take contradictory stands in different jurisdictions. For example, in the US, Facebook projected itself in the category of a publisher, giving it protection under the First Amendment of its control over the material disseminated on its platform. This identity allowed it to justify moderation and removal of content.

“Conspicuously in India, however, it has chosen to identify itself purely as a social media platform, despite its similar functions and services in the two countries,” noted the bench.

The court’s judgement came on a writ petition filed by Facebook’s Vice President Ajit Mohan, challenging validity of the summonses by the Delhi Assembly’s panel in connection with Delhi riots. The Peace and Harmony Committee, headed by AAP MLA Raghav Chadha, was formed on March 2, 2020, following the Delhi riots, issued the summons as “serious questions have been raised on the role of Facebook platform as a mechanism to disseminate hate and divisiveness”.

ALSO READ-India gives final notice to Twitter

READ MORE-Complaint against Twitter, Swara Bhaskar, Arfa Khanum

Categories
-Top News Social Media USA

Trump to remain banned from Facebook for two years

According to the facebook’s new regulations on heightened penalties for public figures during times of civil unrest and ongoing violence, violators may be restricted from creating content for a period of one month to two years, reports Asian Lite Newsdesk

Facebook on Friday suspended US former President Donald Trump for two years, the maximum penalty under a newly revealed set of rules for suspending public figures, from its former indefinite ban set on January 7, 2021.

“We are today announcing new enforcement protocols to be applied in exceptional cases such as this, and we are confirming the time-bound penalty consistent with those protocols which we are applying to Mr. Trump’s accounts… We believe his actions constituted a severe violation of our rules which merit the highest penalty available under the new enforcement protocols. We are suspending his accounts for two years, effective from the date of the initial suspension on January 7 this year,” Nick Clegg, vice president of global affairs at Facebook, said in an announcement.

Facebook

The company also said that it will reevaluate the ban and make the decision whether to end or extend it. According to Clegg, the company will look to experts to assess whether the risk to public safety has receded at the end of the two-year suspension.

“If we determine that there is still a serious risk to public safety, we will extend the restriction for a set period of time and continue to re-evaluate until that risk has receded,” Clegg said.

“When the suspension is eventually lifted, there will be a strict set of rapidly escalating sanctions that will be triggered if Mr. Trump commits further violations in future, up to and including permanent removal of his pages and accounts,” he noted, adding that any penalty the company apply – or choose not to apply – will be controversial.

According to the company’s new regulations on heightened penalties for public figures during times of civil unrest and ongoing violence, violators may be restricted from creating content for a period of one month to two years. Violations after initial restrictions are subject to heightened penalties up to and including permanent removal.

Facebook Oversight Board (FOB) voted against reinstating Trump’s Facebook and Instagram accounts in May while saying it was not appropriate for Facebook to impose an “indefinite” suspension.

The FOB required Facebook to revisit the case, either restore Trump’s accounts, make the ban permanent or define a suspension for a set period of time.

The FOB is a panel of about 20 former political leaders, human rights activists and journalists picked by Facebook to deliberate the company’s content decisions, according to media reports. (Xinhua/IANS)

Categories
-Top News India News Social Media

Twitter, Facebook likely to be blocked in India

Sources said the failure of social media companies to make these appointments in three months has not gone down well with the government..reports Aarti Tikoo Singh

The deadline to comply with the new legal rules meant for big social media platforms, which were issued by the government three months ago, is ending on Tuesday, threatening the operations of the likes of Twitter in India.

According to top official sources, social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook and others, which were required to abide by the rules notified in the gazette of India on February 25 under Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code Rules, 2021, have failed to comply on many accounts till date.

The government’s rules will come into effect from May 26.

“If social media companies do not obey the rules, they may lose their status and protections as intermediaries and may become liable for criminal action as per the existing laws of India,” top official sources said.

Except one Indian social media company, Koo, sources said that none of the top social media intermediaries have appointed a resident grievance officer, a chief compliance officer and a nodal contact person yet.

Sources said the failure of social media companies to make these appointments in three months has not gone down well with the government.

ALSO READ: Trump blasts Facebook for continued ban

With arbitrary suspensions of accounts and inaction over abuses and bigotry on social media platforms, users in India have been persistently complaining against tech giants like Twitter, Facebook and others.

In the latest alleged Congress toolkit controversy, Delhi Police visited Twitter India’s local offices in the National Capital Region on Monday after Twitter had marked one of the tweets of BJP spokesperson Sambit Patra as “manipulated media”.

Twitter’s presumptive judgement has triggered widespread outrage among Indian users across the country.

Sources said the social media platforms which were required to furnish monthly reports as to how many grievances were filed and settled, have failed to do so. Some of the platforms, sources said, have sought more time of up to six months for furnishing compliance.

For some platforms, sources said, the standard reply has been that they will await instructions from their company headquarters in the US, who in turn on their own will have an “expert assessment” to take a view.

The US-based social media platforms have grown huge, thanks to their massive user base and profitable revenues in democracies like India. However, none of the platforms have shown any inclination to comply with India’s domestic laws. Instead, social media platforms have refused to be transparent about their fact-checking mechanism and their criteria to label tweets.

ALSO READ: Facebook urged to scrap ‘Insta for kids’

Categories
Social Media Tech Lite World News

Facebook urged to scrap ‘Insta for kids’

The “Instagram for Kids” app will allow children under the age of 13 to begin using the popular photo-sharing app…reports Asian Lite News

A coalition of 44 US attorneys general signed a letter to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg urging Facebook not to launch “Instagram for Kids”, citing mental health and privacy concerns.

The “Instagram for Kids” app will allow children under the age of 13 to begin using the popular photo-sharing app. However, the attorneys general urge Facebook to abandon its plans to launch this new platform.

The letter lists reasons and cites research to show that Facebook should not go forth with its plans to develop and market a kid-friendly version of the Instagram app, reports GSMArena.

Facebook. (File Photo: IANS)
ALSO READ:Mns spent by Facebook for CEO security

Among the reasons listed in the letter are — Facebook’s poor history of protecting childrena’s privacy and data on the platform, research showing that social media can be harmful to children on physical and psychological levels, children do not have a fully-developed understanding of privacy and can easily be targeted by anonymous predators.

In the release published by the coalition head Attorney General Maura Healey, she cited Zuckerberg’s dismissal of the idea that social media is harmful to children.

The release points out there is much strong evidence and research that contradicts Zuckerberg’s denial.

Currently, children under 13 are not allowed to have an Instagram account unless it is explicitly written in the profilea¿s description that the account is being managed by a parent or guardian.

ALSO READ: Trump blasts Facebook for continued ban

Categories
-Top News USA

Trump blasts Facebook for continued ban

Trump slammed Facebook, Google and Twitter and called them “corrupt”, saying these social media companies “must pay a political price,…reports Asian Lite News

After the independent Oversight Board upheld Facebook’s decision to ban Donald Trump, the former US President slammed the move as a “total disgrace,” saying the Big Tech companies “must pay a political price.”

Trump slammed Facebook, Google and Twitter and called them “corrupt”, saying these social media companies “must pay a political price, and must never again be allowed to destroy and decimate our Electoral Process.”

“What Facebook, Twitter, and Google have done is a total disgrace and an embarrassment to our Country,” Trump said in a statement posted to his new communications platform on his website

“Free Speech has been taken away from the President of the United States because the Radical Left Lunatics are afraid of the truth, but the truth will come out anyway, bigger and stronger than ever before.”

Facebook. (File Photo: IANS)

The Board found that Trump’s posts severely violated Facebook’s rules, and his words of support for those involved in the attack on the US Capitol building legitimised violence in a situation where there was an immediate risk to people’s lives.

“President Trump’s actions on social media encouraged and legitimised violence and were a severe violation of Facebook’s rules,” said Thomas Hughes, Director of the Oversight Board Administration.

Also read:Biden cancels Trump’s border wall projects

“By maintaining an unfounded narrative of electoral fraud and persistent calls to action, Mr Trump created an environment where a serious risk of violence was possible. Facebook’s decision to suspend the President on January 7 was the right one,” Hughes added.

While the Board concluded that Trump should have been suspended from Facebook and Instagram, it also found that Facebook failed to impose a proper penalty.

The Board stated that within six months of the decision, Facebook must reexamine this arbitrary penalty and impose one consistent with its own rules.

The decision came as the former US President launched a new so-called social media platform, which is actually a WordPress blog on his own website.

Also read:Trump sets up his own social media platform

Categories
-Top News USA

Mns spent by Facebook for CEO security

The cost of base security was up to $13.4 million last year, compared to $10.4 million the year prior…reports Asian Lite News.

Facebook spent more than $23 million (about Rs 171 crore) to provide security for its CEO Mark Zuckerberg in 2020.

The company’s annual reviews of company security “identified specific threats to Zuckerberg,” according to a proxy statement filed with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), reports The Verge.

“He is synonymous with Facebook, and as a result, negative sentiment regarding our company is directly associated with, and often transferred to, Mr. Zuckerberg,” read the statement.

Zuckerberg with Barack Obama

Facebook spent $23 million for personal security at Zuckerberg’s residences and for travel for him and his family. The Facebook CEO also received an additional $10 million to put toward security personnel and other security costs.

The cost of base security was up to $13.4 million last year, compared to $10.4 million the year prior.

“Under Mr Zuckerberg’s overall security programme, we pay for costs related to personal security for Mr. Zuckerberg at his residences and during personal travel, including the annual costs of security personnel for his protection and the procurement, installation, and maintenance of certain security measures for his residences,” the company said.

Facebook. (File Photo: IANS)

“We also provide an annual pre-tax allowance of $10 million to Mr Zuckerberg to cover additional costs related to his and his family’s personal security,” Facebook added.

In addition, Zuckerberg uses private aircraft for personal travel in connection with his overall security programme.

On certain occasions, he may be accompanied by guests when using private aircraft.

The costs of Zuckerberg’s security programme vary from year to year depending on requisite security measures, his travel schedule, and other factors.

The company said that the increased costs in 2020 were primarily due to regular personal travel, costs relating to security protocols during the Covid-19 pandemic, increased security coverage during the 2020 US elections and other periods with increased security risk, and market increases in the costs of security personnel.

Zuckerberg has requested to receive only $1 in annual salary and does not receive any bonus payments, equity awards, or other incentive compensation, Facebook added.

Also Read-‘Facebook job ads biased against women’

Read More-61 lakh Indians hit by Facebook data leak

Categories
-Top News Social Media USA

61 lakh Indians hit by Facebook data leak

About a fifth of the social networking platform’s 2.6 billion user base leaked, reports Asian Lite News.

A hacker has posted the phone numbers and sensitive account details of nearly 533 million (53.3 crore) Facebook users — about a fifth of the social networking platform’s entire user base — including over 61 lakh Indian users which has been dumped on a public cybercrime forum.

The leaked data includes Facebook ID numbers, profile names, email addresses, location information, gender details, job data, and other details.

“All 533,000,000 Facebook records were just leaked for free. This means that if you have a Facebook account, it is extremely likely the phone number used for the account was leaked,” tweeted Alon Gal, CTO of security firm Hudson Rock.

“I have yet to see Facebook acknowledging this absolute negligence of your data,” he added.

Facebook has confirmed the leak to The Record.

“This is old data that was previously reported on in 2019. We found and fixed this issue in August 2019,” a Facebook spokesperson was quoted as saying in the report late on Saturday.

With the data now entering the public domain, there is a real danger that this information can be widely used by cybercriminals for email or SMS spam, robocalls, extortion attempts, threats and harassment, etc.

The data is reportedly broken up into download packages by country.

As Cambridge Analytics still haunts nearly 87 million users, including over 5 lakh users from India, this has come as the biggest ever leak of a social media platform that has billions of users.

In January this year, reports first surfaced that the phone numbers of 533 million users were currently being sold via a bot on encrypted messaging platform Telegram, which came from a Facebook vulnerability that was patched by the social network in 2019.

According to a report in Motherboard, the person selling the database full of Facebook users’ phone numbers ($20 per number) lets customers lookup those numbers by using an automated Telegram bot.

Gal had then said: “It is very worrying to see a database of that size being sold in cybercrime communities, it harms our privacy severely and will certainly be used for smishing (the fraudulent practice of sending text messages) and other fraudulent activities by bad actors.”

However, this time, the Facebook data leak has been published with more details.

This is not the first time that Facebook has been caught foot in mouth over a data leak. In 2019, data of 419 million Facebook and 49 million Instagram users was exposed in databases online. In the same year, it had faced another data breach leaving data of 267 million users exposed. Before that, there was the infamous Cambridge Analytica scandal, which was perhaps the first time Mark Zuckerberg’s company had come under the radar for its data collection practices.

Facebook. (File Photo: IANS)

According to a Facebook spokesperson, the bug was only accessible for a short period of time during a small test.

The database, which was first leaked in 2019, was initially being sold on instant messaging platform Telegram for a fee of $20 per search. Facebook had then said that it had patched the vulnerability that has caused the leak. But, in June 2020, and, then in January 2021, the same database was leaked again. The vulnerability was the same: it allowed users to search for a person’s number.

Also Read-Facebook limits Myanmar military content as misinformation spreads

Read More-Facebook bans Australians from sharing news