Can we even expect authors and sharers of viral content to act impartially?
Philip Li

Dan — I don’t have a problem with calling BS per se, but why show BS at all? Platforms like Facebook are already heavily curated; algorithms decide which posts I will never see. Even the NY Times can only print what fits. So, I find it jarring when Zuck punts on fighting fake news (“identifying the ‘truth’ is complicated”), then turns around to build censorship tools for China.

I’ve been playing with bs-blocker (featured in Techcrunch) on my FB feed. Despite the name, there’s no setting for it to actually block BS news. It marks about 1 out of 15 - 20 posts on my feed as suspect. I find myself curious to see which publication and friend posted each. What would the feeds of active fake news spreaders look like on bs-blocker? Would they install it or keep it on for long?

Sunil — I like the idea of a prize or carrotmob. Maybe we purposely focus prizes on smaller pubs and aggregators going above and beyond, so it’s not eg NY Times vs Washington Post each time. It’d be great to help out responsible pubs at a time like this.

But to me, the urgency should be on disrupting problem publications. Unlike the good guys, they are profitable, gleefully ignorant, and dodge responsibility in the name of entertainment. They can’t win a prize like ours.

Dan — thanks for turning me onto Climate Feedback and Hypothesis. Great projects! I just signed up and will help spread the word!