Believe it or not the BBC is going into the Ministry of Truth business. Perhaps it’s well-intentioned now but there’s always a risk of mission creep. The inference that the BBC’s own news is never misleading is interesting.
H/T Lord Beaverbrook
The BBC is to create a dedicated team which will identify and expose “fake news” stories being shared on Facebook and other social media, reports INews. The BBC said it was not seeking to “police the internet”.
But its Reality Check team will identify and correct the most egregious examples of fabricated stories and outright “lies” circulated by fake news sites.
James Harding, BBC Director of News and Current Affairs, told staff: “The BBC can’t edit the internet, but we won’t stand aside either. We will fact check the most popular outliers on Facebook, Instagram and other social media.”
He added: “We are working with Facebook, in particular, to see how we can be most effective. Where we see deliberately misleading stories masquerading as news, we’ll publish a Reality Check that says so.” Facebook has rolled out new features designed to combat “fake news”, including the referral of contested stories to third-party organisations.
The BBC believes it can employ the credibility of its news organisation to assist Facebook. However the corporation said it would not target stories published by “mainstream” media such as UK newspapers.
The Reality Check team, which currently promises to “cut through the spin and uncover the facts” behind contentious issues such as Brexit, will be beefed up for its expanded new role.‘Not policing the internet’A BBC source said: “We won’t be policing the internet or Facebook. We’re talking about the sort of stories that get heavily shared on Facebook, but are in fact not true and are not from authentic news sites.”
INews report continues: here
Tallbloke's Talkshop 
Here is the news…
– – –
By implication will everything that appears on social media be deemed to have been approved by the BBC unless it has a reality check ‘health warning’?
Don’t they already know where most of the fake stories originate?
The city getting rich from fake news
By Emma Jane Kirby
BBC News
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-38168281
Welcome to the BBC. Here is the fake news for Wednesday, 12 December 2007.
– – –
Arctic summers ice-free ‘by 2013’
By Jonathan Amos
Science reporter, BBC News, San Francisco
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7139797.stm
They forgot to add: ‘some scientists think’ or similar qualification of the headline.
Anything news outside the narrow spectrum of the ‘elite’ will be marked as fake.
I would not take as ‘fact’ any comments from the media regarding
Climate Change
Syria
Donald Trump
Russia
etc
Any Posters be they left ,right, or in the middle who have been following the climate change debate will now realise that the traditional media is just a vast propaganda machine.
The machine wants to condition you to accept the groupthink of the elite.
The ‘elite’ are in a panic because the public are getting wise enough to see through the scam.
[reply] note the BBC plan only applies to social media: Facebook etc.
Then they really aren’t listening to those like Climate Sceptics, and indeed the SNP who know for certain the BBC are full of sh*te News.
Now its very difficult for me to comment on the BBC as I’ve largely stopped listening to or watching them, but the last thing I saw was a lunch time broadcast in which they pushing the fake news about Putin having got to Trump.
The BBC should be shut down. They are nothing but a fifth columnist in our society constantly acting to undermine the values of our society from within. They are a political party – one which very few would vote for – using their anti-democratic monopoly of news to push a constant stream of political propaganda at the people of the UK.
And you really don’t realise how bad they are until you stop watching them.
Bryan: add Brexit to your list.
The BBC does not report news, it reports “BBC News”, which is mostly either news about the BBC or opinions of BBC staff.
Donald Trumps comment in press conference on Thursday, when asked question by person identifying himself as working for BBC:
“BBC – There is another beauty” – LOL
That was after he called CNN out as “Fake News” – Rightfully
[reply] will the BBC call ‘reality check’ on that one? 😉
I wonder how the BBC would view people linking news from this site…
https://gumshoenews.com/2015/03/06/matt-campbell-vs-bbc/
The BBC is here pontificating about Buzzfeed and its ‘unverified’ Trump allegations.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-38600531
But yesterday they were leading their news with it, even while saying it was ‘unverified’.
Trying to have their cake and eat it too?
Then they complain about Trump saying ‘fake news’. What do they expect?
Surely these guys need a reality check, they are purveyors of propaganda themselves
What a load of crap
[reply] indeed
I don’t believe that they have thought this through. Where are they going to publish their rebuttals?
On the sites the disputed news appears?
“He added: “We are working with Facebook, in particular, to see how we can be most effective. Where we see deliberately misleading stories masquerading as news, we’ll publish a Reality Check that says so.”
That should be work well.
On their own sites or on their mainstream? Will they not be bringing the “fake news” to a larger audience? Have they not heard of the “Streisland Effect”?
Supposing the “fake news rebuttals” start to crowd out their own stories?
Most critically will they allow comments?
“And because the BBC is trusted it will help people to know what is the truth.”
The final self delusion. “the people” will work it out alright but the truth that they know will not be your truth.
diogenes2: Well said.
“And because the BBC is trusted it will help people to know what is the truth.”
Hardly. They will find a few jokers churning out fake stories, that’s all.
And BBC compulsory licence holders will be paying for the ‘service’.
So the BBC want to restrict and regulate stories emanating from social media whereas SKY want to embrace and use the content to embellish the 24/7 News content. Which is ‘a part of the establishment’ and which is a private business?
http://www.thedrum.com/opinion/2016/09/29/sky-news-wants-air-more-argument-and-opinion-american-news-channels
“For a breaking news broadcaster with the traditions of Sky News, Facebook Live has been a gift. It has produced more than 250 bespoke films for the platform, allowing its 6 million Facebook followers to ask questions of presenters in a way they cannot on TV. “All our talent are experienced in live broadcast – the thing that’s new is the real-time interactivity with the audience,” says Rich Evans, Sky News’ head of social media. In total Sky News will generate one billion video views on Facebook this year.
It is also partnering with Twitter, where it has 3.5 million followers, on the Periscope live streaming platform, recently achieving an audience of 15,000 for Barack Obama’s final speech from the United Nations. It has 400,000 subscribers to its YouTube channel. Half of these social media followers are under 35. “It’s an opportunity to engage a much younger audience,” says Evans.”
What do the social media followers under 35 want?
More left wing socialist orientated content and disagreement with traditional media sources that cater for an older more right of centre audience.
Now you can see why the BBC response team will not be monitoring ‘major’ News providers.
The future is going to involve the internet sources such as Facebook, Twitter and Snap chat more and more in providing ‘News’ content with sources such as http://www.therebel.media/ and http://www.breitbart.com/ being ‘policed’ by the BBC. They are going to have their work cut out for them.
The BBC is still proving it is an outdated establishment that if it’s source of funds, for this read ‘subsidy’ were removed then it would have to change it’s ways or fail.
Where have we seen this previously?
Will the government never learn?
Facebook algorithm banned ‘God’ for 30 days.
‘Noticeably laden with irony, the suspension of God’s profile over a simple criticism evinces a factious pattern by the social media behemoth of censoring anything deemed ‘offensive’ by a minority of users.’
http://www.sott.net/article/339145-Facebook-censorship-goes-too-far-bans-Gods-account-for-His-wrath-against-military-spending
I hope that the BBC will make a better job than Snopes (which is no guarantee on anything). But I won’t hold my breath.
As Philip said
Expecting BBC News
… You get BBC Views
The Left and Islington lot are so up themselves in a bubbleworld they dont what is the World.
Their defn of truth is strange
Eg Climate skeptics are all deniers paid by big oil.
Eg2 UKIP voters are all racists.
Seems that so many BBC staff are misguided SJW missionaries
To that end news output is News-verts originating out of NGO/SpecialInterests PR with specks of real news sandwiched between
Eg ITV News was
10:00 to 10:23 Project sneer at Trump
10:23 2 mins of Virtue Signalling about Genuine Africans in a warzone
10:25 4 mins of PR for Hollywood film Lalaland
Richard Branson calls for police intervention to combat fake news
Richard Branson has hit out at fake news stories and scams circulating the internet using his image, calling for police intervention in tackling major operations.
Read more at: http://inews.co.uk/essentials/news/technology/richard-branson-calls-police-intervention-combat-fake-news/
= = =
‘Fake news’ didn’t change US election outcome: study
January 19, 2017
However, the researchers did reach some potentially troubling conclusions—that 15 percent of people surveyed reported seeing fake news stories, and eight percent reported seeing and believing them.
Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2017-01-fake-news-didnt-election-outcome.html