This bot is spreading misinformation.
This bot is spreading rightwing propaganda.
This bot is spamming every post.
This bot is consistently downvoted.
This bot degrades the user experience.
Please ban it.
The other day it labelled the internet archive as biased towards centre-left. The internet archive - it’s like saying a stack of blank printer paper is biased. Beyond useless.
I mean reality has a left wing bias. I’d like to see someone cute their real world experiences and get the boy to say reality is left center.
good point.
the internet: famously devoid of content.
Totally agree.
As a temporary measure, I have blocked that bot from my feed.
Same, it does wonders.
Mods already said they won’t remove it because they use it as a quick basis if articles get reported.
Which is kinda dumb because you could automate that client side without a community wide bot.
If they wanna have it, I’d rather have it link to a proper media aggregate site like ground news which combine both source reporting and published bias info from multiple sources:
Hi,
we have already a link to ground news, and we try to get api access to other aggregators, but all have reall high prices or just dont have the wanted data. ( We dont want to scrape it as it could get us in legal troubles )
Thanks for your suggestion.
Is that thing still around? I thought it had been removed based on the feedback
It has been removed from some communities, but still in some.
Only one I saw removing it was news, even then it sounded more like removed until blows over
still around, the negative feedback is baseless so far
What bot?
deleted by creator
It’s a bot that inadvertently reminded Lemmy’s that they’re far left
Far right people (MAGA) are so distant from the actual center that they see every leftist as far left. Yes, there are actual far-left communities (especially on Lemmygrad.ml) but the bulk of Lemmy leans mildly left-wing, especially by European standards.
Western Europe is left wing, globally. That’s a very west-euro-centrist attitude you have.
The perception that Western Europe is “left-wing” globally might oversimplify complex political landscapes and reflect a Eurocentric viewpoint. While Western Europe might lean left relative to some countries, this does not necessarily make it a global standard for left-wing politics. It’s important to recognize that political spectrums are not uniform worldwide, and perspectives on what constitutes “left” or “right” can vary dramatically depending on cultural, social, and economic contexts.
Okay, just for the sake of easy communication, can we agree that left/right wing refers to the usual western definitions?
And if so, can we agree that western Europe is pretty left wing?
Yes, although the definition is not the issue but the false balance is
No, because that depends on perspective and Europe is also not a single country.
Your point is taken, but considering all of this your point becomes narrow, and that’s why it’s important to raise this context in this circumstance.
I’m not ignoring you, I just don’t really think this is going anywhere.
Half of the world is China and India. Add in the rest of Asia, Africa, and South America, the world is pretty right wing. Hell, even basic stuff like gay marriage is illegal in most of the world.
Obligatory CZECH REPUBLIC IS CENTRAL YUROP
Just block it if you don’t like it?
Something so universally destructive to understanding is not an opt-out feature of any competent system.
what are you basing that critique off of?
His opinion as he can not provide any source than “trust me bro”.
“universally destructive to understanding”
So what you’re saying is that no one derives any use from the bot? Wow, with that kind of omniscience, I’d expect we could just ask you to judge every news source. Win-win for everyone I suppose if you’re up for it.
Now “generally destructive” would probably be better wording for us mere mortals, but stills seems to be a wildly generalized statement. Or maybe “inadequately precise” would be more realistic, but then that really takes the wind out of the sails to ban it, doesn’t?
Why did you comment? If you followed your own logic then you would have just blocked me instead.
To be serious, I think it’s much better for the community if we do not allow misinformation bots to spam every post.
Because this is the first thing I think I’ve seen you post and blocking everything you disagree with seems sort of stupid?
I think the bot has issues, but I hardly agree that it’s posting misinformation. Incomplete? Imperfect? You bet. But that’s not “misinformation” in any commonly understood meaning. I think the intent of providing additional context on information sources is laudable.
As someone with such a distaste for misinformation, how would you suggest fixing it? That’s a much more useful discussion than “BAN THE THING I PERSONALLY AND SUBJECTIVELY THINK IS BAD!!!” You obviously think misinformation is a problem, so why not suggest a solution?
Currently the bot’s media ratings come from just some guy, who is unaccountable and has an obvious rightwing bias.
If I were to suggest a fix, as you so rudely demanded, I would suggest making the ratings instead come from an open sourced and crowdsourced system. A system where everyone could give their inputs and have transparency, similar to an upvote/downvote system.
Such a system would take many hours to design and maintain, it is not something I personally am willing to contribute, nor would I ask it of any volunteers. This is why I believe the cleanest, easiest, and best solution is to simply ban the bot.
Currently the bot’s media ratings come from just some guy, who is unaccountable and has an obvious rightwing bias.
Wow! Talk about misinformation!!! https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/about/
Or maybe you think they were bought and paid for by some nefarious source? Nope…
Media Bias/Fact Check funding comes from reader donations, third-party advertising, and membership subscriptions. We use third-party advertising to prevent influence and bias, as we do not select the ads you see displayed. Ads are generated based on your search history, cookies, and the current web page content you are viewing. We receive $0 from corporations, foundations, organizations, wealthy investors, or advocacy groups. See details on funding.
…I would suggest making the ratings instead come from an open sourced and crowdsourced system. A system where everyone could give their inputs and have transparency, similar to an upvote/downvote system.
Such a system would take many hours to design and maintain, it is not something I personally am willing to contribute, nor would I ask it of any volunteers.
Thank you for at least providing an iota of something constructive. It’s an interesting idea, and there is academic research that shows it might be possible. But the problem is then in a world already filled with state- and corpo-sponsored organized misinformation campaigns, how does any crowdsourced solution avoid capture and infiltration from the very sources of misinformation it should be assessing? Look at the feature on Twitter and how often that is abused. Then you’d need a fact checker for your fact checker.
Wow so you’re telling me mbfc isn’t staffed by volunteers, instead they are trying to get paid by subs and ad revenue?
The more I learn about mbfc the worse it gets.
Like, any other fact checking site?
mbfc has been independently shown to be accurate.
what are you referring to?
How?
what?
How has it been shown accurate.?
there are independent studies showing its judgments to be the same as other reliable news fact checking sources.
here’s one by the national institute of health.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10500312/
there have been a bunch of studies like this about mbfc, just type in mbfc independent reliability study or something like that in any search engine and you’ll get a bunch of studies showing that they’re as credible as other reliable news fact checking sources and have no track record or evidence of misinformation.
That doesn’t address the issue of mbfc adding it’s own bias in, which is what most have an issue with.
It just focuses on their factual response and even ends with
there is an issue with domain level checks like this as not every piece is held to same internal standards
evidence?
14 hours later, still nothing.
Open source bot when?
Removed by mod
The bot is only “spreading misinformation” to people who are too stupid to realise that “left” and “right” mean politically different things in different countries
Mostly the yanks
What this bot does is analyze US media companies that you Euros would consider “centre right” and mislabels them instead as left.
This is done to shift what we Yanks call “the Overton window” to the right.
The Overton window has been shifting right for decades, which is why “left” and “right” have such a different meaning over here across the pond.
It analyses *worldwide media sources
Sorry if your tiny 3% of the planet doesn’t understand *worldwide views
Right wing in the US is conservative, Left is progressive. It’s backwards compared to the UK.
☝️Lol, see why numpties downvote it?
Hi,
please block the bot if you disagree with it. We are investigating on the constant (bot like downvoting) as this could be against our TOS.
Just that you know, the bot is made by the LW team.
Thanks
Wow I had no idea the LW team made this bot, how disappointing.
Do the consistant downvotes on the bot give you any concern that you are making a mistake here?
I always thought of LW as the “default” sub here on Lemmy, but all of this: the rightwing bot itself, ‘please block the bot instead of downvoting’, the thinly veiled threats of ban; all of it is pretty strong evidence you are attempting to cultivate an ideological echo chamber here.
Anyway, I’ll continue to do my civic duty and downvote the misinformation bot whenever I happen to see it.
Thanks
Shitty thing gets downvoted so it must be bots doing the downvoting and not just normal members downvoting said shitty thing. Pretty interesting take up there.
still no evidence for your claims.
The only thing we currently see is. Bot bad BAN!! BAN!! Its a threat to our democracy!!! BOT BAD BECAUSE IT SAID MY FAVORITE NEWS SITE IS BAD!!!
We dont see real feedback, just rants about MBFC and this doesnt get us anywhere. ( See your post )
Wow you continue to surprise me, I would have never expected this kind of communication to come publically from a mod.
I think I have made my criticisms of MBFC fairly clear, and your characterization of my criticisms is an obvious strawman.
But since I have your attention, let me try to rephrase the problem: Lemmy was built on principles of open source, transparency, freedom of speech, and community input. The MBFC bot does not follow any of these principles.
In it’s current form, the MBFC bot is a stain on the integrity of LW. I urge you to make a change.
The community has largely made their voice heard on the subject, as evidenced by the large number of downvotes on the bot and on your posts here. I urge you to listen to them.
*admin not just mod
I like the MBFC bot. If you don’t like it, you can block it. And, you don’t speak for me or the community.
Just that i write it to you too:
We give you freedom to block anyone, anytime and on your disgression.
Your criticism is just as said a loud cry about how bad mbfc is in your eyes.
We urgently making changes but if those people who just complain and do not research and make informed change requests to us. We zse all of our resources just to tell you we are discussing it with the news and world community mods what other thing can we add and other things, like the idea of open source the bot etc.
The votes are just the common ones. That arent blocking it, some even vote manipulation.
I DO NOT say mbfc is allmighty god, and makes mistakes, thus we added a link to ground.news to let you have multiple opinions.
You keep suggesting that I am uninformed and unresearched, so please correct me if I got any of the facts wrong.
You keep suggesting that my criticism is just a loud cry, but this is just hand waving the problem away. You have failed to directly address any of my concerns.
To add to my list of cocerns, here is a new one: Have you or any other LW mods/admins been paid by MBFC?
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Yeah, go see his response in another part of this thread to my request to provide some constructive feedback if you haven’t already. It was all just the same bad faith misinformation about the bot and the data source. I even linked the sources for how it actually worked and no reply, just downvotes.
Yes, he just accuses to spread misinformation and is a right wing propaganda bot, without linking any source of MBFC beeing super right propaganda machine.
If i am honest i got other messages tell me it is a left propaganda machine, if we sum it up its a center propaganda machine. For me all this, screams just bad faith.
. We are investigating on the constant (bot like downvoting) as this could be against our TOS.
I’m sorry down voting a bot is against TOS? Wtf???
That’s not what he was saying.
They are insinuating that only bots are down voting it not users
“…insinuating that only bots are down voting…” (emphasis added)
No, they’re not saying “only”, they’re saying there may be bots doing some of the downvoting. E.g. probably based off IPs, client strings, or something else.
If that’s is actually the case they should say that not make it sound like that.
Doesn’t help so many get mysteriously banned after being critical of the shitty bot
Well the constant downvoting might be a hint, not?
Yes, if it wasnt just the usual suspects who just ignore the hints, to block the bot.
Feel also free to join other communities such as !globalnews@lemmy.zip
So “rightwing” information is “propaganda” and “misinformation”? Is that what youre saying?
I’m saying that if you take “rightwing” information and intentionally mislabel it as “leftwing”, yes that is misinformation.
