My initial response to the FB fake news controversy was that where were the fake news? I am mainly on Twitter not FB, I know Twitter suffers far more than FB from this problem (if it could be called this way).
In physical world, information is spread based on credibility measured by money. People would spend their money on the source they feel like it is worth of. In digital world, information is spread based on retweet measured by click. People would say, perception is reality, which is a norm nowadays.
However from my experience, people forget about the fake news very quickly. Basically no one would care such thing after a day or so. For example, after the day FBI cleared Hillary’s name once again, WikiLeaks published the “leaked Email” suggested that an intelligence organisation chatting about Hillary really killed Vince Foster. Many people RT it and they all cried out loud that no media were reporting it. This leak was too cheap and too convenient. That’s why no news media even Fox didn’t bother to cover.
Did it cost Hillary’s credibility according to “perception is reality”? it might do. But so did Trump’s sex scandals.
This phenomena is chaotic and also beautiful, this is freedom. That is why we fight for a louder voice that is why we fight for the truth and debunk the fake news. Not buying the fake stories is more powerful than censorship. We all know what kind of quality The Daily Mail and The Sun is. No intellectual people buy them but not ban them.
A few words on Zuckerberg.
I don’t trust this man. He is too easy to be compromised (or he appears to be in this way), like jogging in Beijing, meeting Xi Jinping, a country where FB is not even accessible and now from left-wing media pressure. All he cares about is FB continues to be a hub people visit and the company’s profit. In fact he is a lot like a politician now. That is why FB is popular than Twitter, that is why Twitter is much better than FB.
Integrity doesn’t come without a price.