PDA

View Full Version : The weirdest and most dangerous function on Facebook that is open to everyone



Harold Mansfield
07-12-2013, 09:55 AM
Many of you already know this, but I started thinking about it a lot recently.

Did you know that when you share someone elses link or article on Facebook, that you can change the headline of the story?

I talk politics A LOT with my friends of Facebook, and there have been times when they've shared a headline that's been making the rounds and I'll see that somewhere along the way, someone changed the headline to make it more controversial so that more people on a certain side of an issue will share it.

For instance, once we were talking the obligatory "Obama is a secret Muslim who's out to destroy America, and he and Holder are going to round everyone up into FEMA concentration camps" garbage ( yeah, I have friends like that), so to screw with them I posted a Washington Post article about the Whitey Bulger trial and changed the headline to "Holder's Department of Justice goes after Whitey".

And boy did they have a conniption in the comments without ever reading the article, and went on the assumption that this was a real headline.

To me, that's a pretty dangerous and irresponsible option. Social Media is already a cesspool of misinformation and people already don't read anything. They just pass around what ever meme or headline gets them riled up.

What if your competition started changing the titles of your blog posts to make you look like an idiot, and shared them with their audience?

I just think the ability to misrepresent someone using their own articles is a little dangerous.

Am I just being paranoid?
What do you guys think?

KristineS
07-12-2013, 10:54 AM
Didn't know this was possible, but I agree with you that it could have a dangerous side. Social media is all "he said/she said" anyway, so if someone did change a headline on something your wrote to something more controversial or damaging, the burden of proof would be on you to prove the post didn't start out that way. I'm not a fan of this feature. I don't mind people sharing things I post, but I'm not comfortable with them being able to change the headline that I gave the post. I can see a lot of potential for problems here.

Wozcreative
07-12-2013, 01:56 PM
It's as dangerous as those with photoshop. You learn to believe what you want on the internet. Or twitter (enough people have been rumoured to be dead on twitter), or even news media that take your story and twist it. People will believe what they want.

nealrm
07-12-2013, 03:11 PM
The whole movement towards "internet reporters" has me worried. With old media you had editors and managers that at least looked at the article to see if it passed the smell test. Now any nut can get on the internet, call themselves a reporter and state whatever they want. Yahoo will pick them up if they get enough traffic and post them as a news story.

As for Obama being a secret Muslim, It's true. My second cousin, knows someone that talked in a bar with a guy that attends a mosque in the same city as the one Obama attends. You can't get any more factual than that.

Harold Mansfield
07-12-2013, 03:21 PM
The whole movement towards "internet reporters" has me worried. With old media you had editors and managers that at least looked at the article to see if it passed the smell test. Now any nut can get on the internet, call themselves a reporter and state whatever they want. Yahoo will pick them up if they get enough traffic and post them as a news story.

True. I used to write music articles for Examiner. Basically they looked at my old blog and said OK, here's your log in info. Go get 'em.

So now when I see an Examiner article on politics, I remember the stringent background check they put me through. I had $10 for a domain and got some cheap hosting. I must be a seasoned, reputable professional.

Freelancier
07-12-2013, 03:28 PM
People will believe what they want.

This. We've all seen it. People cherry-pick their "facts" from suspect sources and if it gets repeated enough it becomes its own "truth". The internet democratized "news", but forgot to tell everyone that they now have to work harder to figure out what's really true and what's false and all the shades of gray in between.

There have been psychological studies about how people get a huge feel-good dopamine hit when they read something they already agree with, no matter how truthful the information. I find I most enjoy talking with people who question their own assumptions, because they're not looking for a dopamine hit from having their beliefs confirmed, they're looking to explore their reality and see where it takes them.

As for social media and deception. It's always been there. If it's on the internet, it must be true, right?

patrickprecisione
07-15-2013, 08:13 AM
You know, I knew you could do this but I never thought about it being used for anything like this. I agree with Woz, you need to be cautious about what you read on the Internet. Just about every time I come across a fishy story I head right over to Snopes.com to see if it's legit. It's amazing how many people blindly share a story without once questioning its validity. But I suppose that's nothing new.

LGCG
07-16-2013, 09:59 AM
This. We've all seen it. People cherry-pick their "facts" from suspect sources and if it gets repeated enough it becomes its own "truth". The internet democratized "news", but forgot to tell everyone that they now have to work harder to figure out what's really true and what's false and all the shades of gray in between.


Similar to this- I remember I saw a "news" story that was shared a few thousand times on Facebook. Apparently Ellen DeGeneres was on her show discussing the dangers of eating food that was microwaved in a plastic container. Suspiciously there was no video of this even though it happened recently on a TV show. I was suspicious so I Googled it and immediately found it was a hoax. needless to say, I now usually take these type of "news" stories from Facebook with a grain of salt.

OlegLola
07-16-2013, 10:43 AM
Yes, the problem really exists. Bit no one knows how to deal with it. And not only Facebook and articles are suffering. It's getting more and more difficult to make sure that the information is true...But this is a life. Suppose that it's extremely complicated to verify everything on the web. But it is worth to try at least .

carloborja
07-17-2013, 09:44 PM
Are you referring to the headline of the shared article itself? Doesn't it retain the details (or snippet) of the article on a box inside the post?

Or, maybe you are referring to the comment that you can add when you re-share the article?

Anyway, the point is online journalism could be abused in today's world where anyone can be a journalist on Facebook or Twitter. That's a sad fact.

Harold Mansfield
07-17-2013, 10:17 PM
Are you referring to the headline of the shared article itself? Doesn't it retain the details (or snippet) of the article on a box inside the post?

Or, maybe you are referring to the comment that you can add when you re-share the article?


I'm referring to the headline itself. You can change it.

carloborja
07-17-2013, 10:24 PM
I'm referring to the headline itself. You can change it.

Would have to check on that again. Sounds alarming to me.

Harold Mansfield
07-17-2013, 10:26 PM
When you share an article, in the pop up window, click on the headline. It's editable. So is the excerpt. But the link to the source is not.

nealrm
07-18-2013, 08:18 AM
So when you change the headline, it is changed only for those that you share it with.

Harold Mansfield
07-18-2013, 09:01 AM
So when you change the headline, it is changed only for those that you share it with.
Yes, you aren't changing the original post. You are changing it as you post it to your timeline that your friends see, or where ever you post it, on a page that you administer, other peoples timeline. Where ever.

patrickprecisione
07-26-2013, 09:45 AM
Yes, you aren't changing the original post. You are changing it as you post it to your timeline that your friends see, or where ever you post it, on a page that you administer, other peoples timeline. Where ever.

I hear ya, Harold. But I don't think it's that big of a deal. There's plenty of opportunity for people to misinterpret things. If people want to believe everything they read there's nothing you can do about that.

Freelancier
07-26-2013, 09:56 AM
If people want to believe everything they read there's nothing you can do about that.

Alice laughed: "There's no use trying," she said; "one can't believe impossible things."
"I daresay you haven't had much practice," said the Queen. "When I was younger, I always did it for half an hour a day. Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast."

I'm guessing the Queen was watching Fox and Friends before breakfast....

LGCG
08-02-2013, 11:12 AM
I'm guessing the Queen was watching Fox and Friends before breakfast....

[rim shot]

nealrm
08-02-2013, 01:14 PM
I think the main point we need to get out of this is -- to never believe any of the headlines that Harold shares with us. :p

Joking aside, never believe any of the headlines from general new sources. Read the story. The headline are there to attract attention not to give out facts.

patrickprecisione
08-05-2013, 09:58 AM
I think the main point we need to get out of this is -- to never believe any of the headlines that Harold shares with us. :p

Joking aside, never believe any of the headlines from general new sources. Read the story. The headline are there to attract attention not to give out facts.

Yeah, a healthy bit of skepticism is always a good thing. Especially when it comes to the goofy things your friends post on Facebook.

rcalie
08-26-2013, 02:45 PM
I didn't think of a malevolent use as Harold pointed out, but liked to be able to spice up a dull headline that was attached to good content. You can also edit the shared content (excerpt) frame as well as upload a different thumbnail.

The bottom line is if you can do anything useful, someone will find a way to exploit it for nefarious reasons.

LGCG
08-27-2013, 02:33 PM
I didn't think of a malevolent use as Harold pointed out, but liked to be able to spice up a dull headline that was attached to good content. You can also edit the shared content (excerpt) frame as well as upload a different thumbnail.

The bottom line is if you can do anything useful, someone will find a way to exploit it for nefarious reasons.

That's a good point. I suppose Harold's concern is that it could be abused. Although saying it could be abused isn't quite the same as saying it is being abused.

Osprey
10-20-2013, 01:04 PM
I know one thing - that was a funny headline...I almost got fired up reading it too. lol You almost got me and all you were doing was trying to explain it...awesome!

mrrodosmith
11-10-2013, 06:28 PM
Very true. A lot of comments people make on social media sites in response to some article seems to be based on the title alone and nothing to do with the content. Kinda sad when that shows how lazy people are when it comes to reading an article. What can you do?

patrickprecisione
11-14-2013, 10:39 AM
Very true. A lot of comments people make on social media sites in response to some article seems to be based on the title alone and nothing to do with the content.

Oh for sure. But social media is built in a way so that information is gleamed rather than digested in full. Not to say that that's the fault of social media, as people are just built to scan information that way.