What if Facebook Gave Us an Opposing-Viewpoints Button?

Many Facebook users already disconnect from those with differing points of view.  I'm not sure they'd willingly seek out news that challenges their established biases.

Interesting proposal.

I generally just look to the WSJ for more conservative points of views and the NYT and the Washington Post for the liberal takes on things.  That being said, the author's point that these are not necessarily what folks who don't have my point of view are seeing is valid.

There are lots of other stories and op-eds out there in other places that I never see.  I tend not to look to the more rabid sources on either end or the spectrum as I dismiss them out of hand.

Just because I think they are rubbish, doesn't mean I should not be aware of them as they are helping to form the opinions of others.  And, who knows, maybe I'll learn something?  It could be quite eye opening.

"What if Facebook Gave Us an Opposing-Viewpoints Button?"What if the Wall Street Journal did?

I read the Journal for business purposes - and to basically laugh at everything else the conservative zealots of the world- including most if not all Journal "reporters" have to say.This "news paper" is only slightly less biased than AM talk radio.

Facebook, on the other hand, does not put itself out as a media source - it, like everything in the Journal that is not business related, is just entertainment folks.....

@ Mary Blasy

Thank you !

What if the WSJ provided an opposing views button?  What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

What?  Most wsj readers would not use it??  Well guess what, I doubt most facebook folks would use one either, or any non conservative site.  

Remember, 305 million Americans do not tune into Fox.  A small minority of Americans feast on that kind of conservative 'news' and the editorials you find in the wsj.

What if Facebook Gave Us an Opposing-Viewpoints Button?

What if no one cared about Faceplant?

Right here in this newspaper last week, Tom Petty said it very well indeed:  “I have a life, so I don’t have to invent one on Facebook,”

Try international news outlets. They don't have "a dog in the fight". They tend to be more neutral in their views. 

The most dangerous people in the world are those who select the algorithms by which information is disseminated on the internet.

Google had the most physical visits of all Lobbyists to the White House.  If that doesn't send chills up your spine, nothing will.

The data mining technique is currently working for most folks who like to hang with those with similar views.  Make sure to have friends with opposing ideology, diverse faith and people from around the world.  Take advantage of FB and not be controlled by it. 

Use the controls (like, etc.) and also comment to continue receive opposing views.  If not your world will get smaller.

I am a Libertarian, something that probably 1/3 of Republicans, and 1/3 of Democrats would be if they honestly thought about it.

I respond to posts from both liberal and conservative perspectives, whether I agree with them or not, so I get both sets of feeds.

I also have friends on both ends of the political spectrum, whose posts and feeds I see.  My personal policy is that I will never directly respond to one of my friend's post that I happen to disagree with, for civility's sake.  Political disagreements are NOT more important than friendship.

another technical attempt at the issue http://leftrightpolitics.com/

I only use Facebook for keeping in touch with relatives and friends, but I think the red/blue interactive piece is a great illustration of how the web creates these echo chambers instead of exposing people to multiple points of view.  But, I'd say that's a problem with the media in general.  With so many choices, people tend to gravitate to those news sources and blogs that confirm their opinions.

@James Ewins  I am quite intelligent and I like Facebook.  I'm from a big family and it allows us to connect very easily.  It draws us closer.  We can help each other more easily.  Newlyweds and new parents in my extended family can find solace in the advice of more experienced relations and older members can revel in the experiences of the younger. 

You are in total control of those you connect with and what you "expose".  I only wish my aged parents (now in their 90s) had opted to become computer-savvy, so they could share and watch their family grow.  Cousins and old friends are no longer strangers you see rarely.  Social isolation amongst middle-age and older men can be devastating; Facebook can really serve this group.  There are SOOOO many potential and positive applications.  The longer I am on it, the more I am convinced this is one of the great applications of the computer.

Not to mention, James: It's another place where you could post your uninformed opinion!

"President Barack Obama recently expressed dismay about a world where Democrats and Republicans alike live in echo chambers"

Haha funny. The President is a man who has liquidated every single adviser and cabinet member who has offered opinions that differed from the Obama-Jarret-Rhodes axis and its supporting array of junior yes-men.

The thing is the left does not want to hear opposing view points. They will deny this of course but look at their ACTIONS. Anyone who doesn't accept a view like "climate change" or "gay marriage" is shouted down and can have their lives destroyed if they express a point of view deemed not acceptable by the left wing intelligensia in public. Witness the CEO of Mozilla who was fired for simply donating a small amount of money to a traditional marriage initiative that had been on the ballot 5 years earlier. 

@David Mcmahon Please. The same could be said of conservatives. Open-mindedness does not have a left/right tilt. Some conservatives are open minded as are some liberals. Others are not.

@David Mcmahon @James Grosser Mr. Mcmahon, it's ironic that you ask "Why do you insist on lying?" in a post that blasts liberals for trying to shut down debate. Because, you see, accusing someone of lying right off the bat might be taken for trying to shut down debate.

@James Grosser @David Mcmahon

Why do you insist on lying?

Sorry pal I am calling BS on your narrative. While some conservatives may not be open minded, they do not try to shut down debate the way liberals do. Liberals are social justice warriors, and that is how they roll. All one has to do is look up safe spaces, racism, homophobia, xenophobia, climate change, gay marriage, conservatives not allowed to speak on campus and get flooded with examples of liberals crushing dissent. 

Talk about the Kettle (WSJ) calling the Pot (Facebook) black. 

Personally, I had not noticed Facebook had stories or at least I never read one.   No I don't watch animal videos  (especially cat) either.

You're not Facebook's customer, you're their product, to think otherwise is foolish.

> Imagine if you could flip a switch on Facebook, and turn all the conservative viewpoints that you see liberal, or vice versa.                  Imagine if you could just get off Facebook entirely and think for yourself.

Is this how people use Facebook? To the extent I use Facebook, I get posts from actual people I actually know, not from news organizations, interest groups or celebrities. I only follow real people I know personally.

That plus cat videos.

@James Grosser I'm surprised anyone goes to Facebook for news.

Great article, thank you for this.

"What if Facebook Gave Us an Opposing-Viewpoints Button?"

Then they would still have control over what you read.  You know, the fact that no one seems to understand that your phone, your computer, your tablet or your gas grill make no decisions just seems to escape people.  None of these devices do anything but what they are programmed to do!  That 99% of American's can't read or understand programming, is simply an indication of how badly our education system has treated us and how far behind it is falling. 

@Mark Hanscomb  /  I know some homeschoolers, who don't teach science-history- only bible stories as 100% true, young Earth.

And parents can't understand why child only gets jobs @ Walmart.

@Larry Hayward @Terry P. Carriker @Mark Hanscomb

Bernie will fix it for them. 

@Terry P. Carriker

Hey there .   .   .    Terry's trolling again!

@Terry P. Carriker @Mark Hanscomb I know some college graduates who are up to their eyeballs in debt and can't get jobs. And they can't understand why. 

Extreme right - wingers already have Fox News-Rush.

@Crux FiveTen @Terry P. Carriker  /  Remember only about 14% of US  adult population have extreme right - winger views.

@Terry P. Carriker The article is about Facebook and the question is "Do you really want tech companies shaping our news?". 

I read both the NY Times online and the WSJ online.  It would be nice if both gave us opposing view buttons as well.  I think people on both sides of the aisle need to  accept that sometimes the "other" side has at least a little bit of merit. 

@Jeff Nesselhuf Same here. I notice is that it's often not so much the difference in viewpoint as what the WSJ and NYT consider worth publishing.  For basic news the reporting does not seem all that different when the story is the same. 

Who really needs Facebook? Surely WSJ has better stories to write.

I don't want to see any viewpoints because it's rare that anyone attempts to justify theirs. Looking at the Facebook infographic, I'm bombarded by why the other guy is the spawn of Satan and evil, but I'm missing something very important - what are the merits of supporting yours?

I have a solid philosophy I live by. If your sales pitch has to mention why the other product is garbage, then that means yours doesn't have anything worth promoting, so why should I buy yours? It's not like I have to buy either one of them. Not buying is a viable option.

If you can't make your case without attacking someone else's opinion, then your case isn't worth my energy considering.

That's a button I'd like to see on Facebook - removing any opinion that can't state its case without talking about the other guy.

@Justin Murray 

I agree, for many people it is easier to bad-mouth the other side than to say why your side is better.

Whenever I see or hear someone launch an ad hominem attack I know they did not do their homework and do not have the facts at hand to back up their viewpoint.  Whether that viewpoint is closer to reality than the other side is immaterial unless you have the facts to bolster your argument.

@Justin Murray Quite right.  Ad hominem attacks seem to be the rule, not the exception.  I want to see both sides (but especially the Leftists) state THEIR case, not simply denigrate the other's case.

I reckon at 58 years old, I am getting old. Up until all the "Hub-Bub" over FB and News on it, I had no idea that one can get news/read news on FB. I have a FB Account in my name but! I use it for all things "Nautical," and to paraphrase Jimmy Buffett,  "Boats Beaches Bars & Ballads. 

Facebook, Google, and most of Silicon Valley are onboard with Hillary at this time because they are primarily interested in the world as their market and not the measy little USA, to which they have little gratitude, probably in large part because they know so little American (or world) history.

Now there's nothing wrong with them having the world as their market, except they don't have to sell anything to the Chinese or the Russians; all they have to do is to have those people using their services because then these people are providing data which they can crunch with their AI algorithms and then sell the mined data for big profits.  Then can also use it eventually to take over the world in a political sense; the World Troika Leaders Zuckerberg, Brin and Page. It's already happening because power is the ability to change someone's behavior in ways he/she don't necessarily want to go.  Ever had to adjust to a new operating system on your computer?

@Nathan Edelson

They are on board with Hillary because they have guilty white people syndrome. They are limousine liberals that can voice concern about "undocumented immigrants" while living behind high walls in sheltered mansions. 

" What if Facebook Gave Us an Opposing-Viewpoints Button?"

OK. I agree. Now, why don't the WSJ Powers That Be, Give Us Peasants A Thumbs Down Button? This Way We Can Thumbs Down The Few Extreme Far Left Things That Hang Out On The Corner Of WSJ & Down Jones. 

Absolutely fascinating.  I followed some of the links on both sides.  While slanted and omitting some facts, I found no outright BS posts on the Blue sides ,even some rather innocuous seeming posts.  However, if you drill down on the red side, 20-25% of what the headlines purport as "truth"  really isn't truth.  Love to see a ""Politifact" type fact-checking feed in the middle--perhaps with the left critiquing the Red side and the Right critiquing what is said on the blue side. .

what is the big deal if Facebook tilts left?

ALL media outlets are biased one way or the other.

Don't like it? Look at a different outlet.