Category Archives: Fake News

Stocks were down this morning amid a big January jobs report beat. Yields jumped, too, in response to last months far better than expected payrolls data. 467,000 jobs were added in January according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), surpassing the 150,000 payroll estimate with ease as unemployment climbed to 4% from 3.9%. The BLS also adjusted Decembers payroll gain from 199,000 to 510,000 and Novembers total jobs added from 249,000 to 647,000.

It was a huge shock to Wall Street analysts, many of whom were predicting a major jobs contraction. Even the White House warned last week that the numbers would come in low due to the Omicron variant.

Instead, US labor roared.

Or did it?

While the headline print was impressive, a deeper dive into the January jobs report showed what truly drove the 465,000 payroll gain:

A massive, unprecedented seasonal adjustment by the BLS.

Unadjusted, payrolls actually fell in January (as they often do). Historically speaking, many holiday-related jobs are no longer needed as the economy transitions from December to January. The BLS uses seasonal adjustments to account for the resulting reduction in employment.

And while theres usually a significant tick lower that needs to be adjusted for in January, last months post-Christmas drop was a doozy. 2.8 million jobs were lost in January (unadjusted), meaning that the BLS adjusted last months jobs number higher by over 3.2 million payrolls (to reflect a 467,000 payroll gain), which included adjustments for seasonality, Covid, and population the last of which is done every January each year. The seasonal adjustment alone totaled 309,000 jobs, the most ever for the month of January.

But they didnt stop there. The BLS also revised lower the jobs data from March-July by removing 1.061 million payrolls. August-December saw an upward revision of 817,000 jobs.

This calls into question virtually every jobs report released in 2021. Januarys report, however, was truly special. As we just mentioned, there had never been a January seasonal adjustment of this magnitude. The population adjustment was huge, too.

Last month, the BLS issued a +1.471 million payroll adjustment (blue oval) due to population control alone. Januarys Household Survey, from which the national unemployment rate is derived, showed a real 272,000 monthly payroll reduction (red circle). The BLS adjusted that number higher by 1.471 million (again, due to population control), leading to a net gain of 1.199 million payrolls (orange oval).

This is all data included in the January jobs report. Its not compiled by outside analysts or Wall Street banks. Its the governments official tally.

What this means is that, as we had suggested several times last year, the market was trading on misleading jobs data for months. The BLSs seasonal adjustments of 2021 were way behind what they actually should have been, and now, theyre playing catchup by over-adjusting in the opposite direction.

This also suggests that Januarys jobs data is as good as it will get in 2022. Everything from here will see adjustments to the downside. Februarys jobs report is likely to include a significant downward revision to Januarys tally.

Investors took this mornings report as a sign that the Fed would stay on course with its plan to hike rates in March. And theyre right; todays data did little to dislodge the Feds current position. But not because of the massive payrolls beat, which was really the result of some truly staggering adjustments.

What should really incentivize the Fed to keep the pedal to the metal were Januarys hourly earnings, which rose 0.7% month-over-month (vs. 0.5% expected) and 5.7% year-over-year, crushing the +5.2% consensus estimate. Thats the fastest annual increase in hourly wages since May 2020 when the US was beginning to reopen after months of economy-strangling lockdowns.

This surge in wages will only add to inflation moving forward, which the Fed fears far more than any additional labor gains for the US economy. After all, Fed Chairman Jerome Powell said that the US already reached full employment several months ago. Jobs have little bearing on monetary policy now as a result.

So, the market got it right this morning in thinking that the Fed is still on track to hike rates in March. They were accidentally right, of course, in that they probably used the wrong data payrolls instead of hourly wages to justify their reaction. But their conclusion was correct all the same.

That could threaten the markets ongoing bullish bounce, which now dangles within range of a retracement to the recent lows. That hasnt happened yet, but it certainly could as March draws closer with each passing day and rate hike-driven fears continue to mount, encouraged further by juiced-up BLS reports.

See the original post here:

The January Jobs Report Is "Fake News," Here's Why - Unseen Opportunity

Actor Ali Asgar thought the reports of comedian and colleague Sunil Grover suffering heart attack were fake. In an exclusive chat he talks about not being in touch with the actor.

Actor Ali Asgar was extremely stunned when he got to know about colleague and comedian Sunil Grovers heart attack. Grover was discharged on Thursday after going through bypass surgery. It was extremely shocking. At his age, he is pretty fit and active, so it was scary at the same time, says Asgar.

Asgar was so taken aback by the news that says, I thought it was fake news. I really thought there was something fishy initially. (Even) When he was out of the hospital, I thought there must be something wrong; its a human body. I was still not convinced it was a heart attack. But when I got to know that it was a heart attack, Asgar pauses and continues: He is somebody who makes everyone laugh, this shouldnt happen to him. Everyones prayers are with him. I feel he will be more careful. I think kaam ke chakkar mein wo over busy hogaya hoga.

While the two have been a part of a few comedy shows, Asgar discloses that he was not in touch with him. However, he mentions speaking to his manager. I enquired about his health and asked him (the manager) whenever he (Grover) is fine to let me know. Right now, he needs rest. But I will get in touch with him and meet him, he ends.

Subscribe to our best newsletters

HT Daily Capsule: Dissecting days top stories with big questions, numbers and quizzes.

Subscribed to newsletter successfully

Thank you for subscribing to our Daily News Capsule newsletter.

See the article here:

Exclusive: Ali Asgar shocked to hear Sunil Grover suffer a heart attack, says, I thought it was fake news - Hindustan Times

For many of us, 2016 is going down as a year to forget. Election upsets, Zika, the Syrian crisis, and unfortunately tons of fake news about all of the above and everything in between.

Denzel Washington was recently quoted as saying, If you dont read the newspaper, youre uninformed. If you do read the newspaper, youre misinformed. So what should you do? You want to be informed, but a good deal of the information out there is incorrect or biased. Here are some things to keep an eye out for when reading a news article.

Links and citations allow us to easily access, read, and explore more about the information found in the article. Authors include references and links to validate their story, so if an article is missing links and references, it is a huge red flag.

Many big name news sites, such as CNN, do not include links or citations, but other sites do. The articles that you read should look similar to this one from LiveScience.coms article, Why Do We Fall for Fake News? Check out the hyperlinks throughout the article. They help validate the information that the author wrote about.

An article without an authors name is another red flag. Most authors who put the time in to develop a well-researched news story like having their name attached to it. When an article is missing the name of the individual who wrote it, the reader isnt sure whether its a trusted journalist who wrote the article or an angry teenager. Only consider trusting articles with an authors name attached to it.

Do a Google search on the authors name to find their occupation and locate other articles that the author has composed. Is the author an expert in their field? Have they written other well-researched articles? Do a quick background check on the author to determine their credibility.

On the top or bottom of most websites, you should see a section titled About Us. This section should give you a brief run-down of the mission and goals of the site. Do they aspire to post trustworthy news? Do they have an authoritative team of journalists and writers? Or is it a website that allows the general public to post articles? Reading about the website that hosts the article can help you determine if they post trustworthy sources.

Authors tend to read and re-read their articles numerous times prior to posting. In addition, they often have others proofread their work. When spelling or grammatical errors are present, this shows that the author might have hastily posted the information or they may not be an authoritative expert in the content that theyre writing about.

Copy and paste a quote from the article into Googles search bar. Are you able to find that same quote on another website or did your search produce a quote that is a bit different than the one in the article? Writers sometimes modify quotes to change their meaning and to make their content persuade you into believing something that isnt 100% true.

Do a simple keyword search on Google for a similar article. If youre unable to find anything remotely similar, chances are that the author didnt do their research, made up much of the information in the article, or are fully sharing their opinion on a topic not factual news. Stick to trusting news articles that have similar pieces found on the Internet.

News articles are essentially meant to inform you by showing all sides of a topic; the good, the bad, and the ugly. If an article only features one viewpoint, the reader should remind themselves that theyre not seeing the full picture. Be cautious of news articles that only report one side of the story.

A headline can do more than provide a snippet of what the entire piece is about; it can also persuade us to believe something before we even read the article. Authors sometimes fabricate their headlines, knowing that you might walk away without reading the article and believing their claim. If the headline causes your eyes to pop out of your head, read the entire article first before deciding to trust the information or not.

If the story is unbelievable, chances are it is! Trust your gut instinct and check for many of items discussed in this article.

If you believe something is incorrect, simply do not share it with others. Sharing fake news articles pushes them higher up in search result pages, causing others to come across them quickly and believing the content.

Some sites, such as Facebook, allow you to flag posts that are harmful or inappropriate. If you believe that a news story is false, make sure to report it to the host so they can take it down if necessary.

We know, it takes time to double check the information in news articles, but be an informed citizen and find out if what youre reading and sharing is factual or not.

Richter, Greg. Denzel Washington: Media Should Tell the Truth, Stop BS Newsmax, 6 Dec.2016, http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/media-truth-Denzel-Washington-BS/2016/12/06/id/762575/.

Sundar, S. Shyam. Why Do We Fall for Fake News? LiveScience, Purch, 9 Dec. 2016,www.livescience.com/57151-why-we-fall-for-fake-news.html.

Konnikova, Maria. How Headlines Change the Way We Think. The New Yorker, Conde Nast, 17 Dec. 2014, http://www.newyorker.com/science/maria-konnikova/headlines-change-way-think.

Create bibliographies like theone above withour EasyBib citation service.

Related blog posts:

Link:

10 Ways to Spot a Fake News Article - EasyBib Blog

More than half of people in Ireland (57%) struggle to tell the difference between real news and fake news on the internet, according to new research.

The new wide-ranging report on digital usage also found that 85% of people feel that fake news is a major problem for the world today.

Just under three-quarters (74%) said they rely on multiple sources for their news, while just under two-thirds (65%) believe that news from traditional news providers is trustworthy.

Only 16% said that the news on social media platforms is trustworthy, however, this figure increased to 28% among those aged 18 to 24. Overall, 57% of those who took part in the survey said it was difficult to discern what news was real, and what news was fake on social media.

In terms of social media usage generally, the report found that 76% of Irish people use social media platforms and messaging services across their devices.

Interestingly, 42% said they had stopped using at least one platform, either on a temporary or permanent basis, over the past year.

Those who did cited a number of reasons for their decision including:

A huge number of respondents stopped using one or more social media platforms, either temporarily or permanently, in the last year. A perception of too much fake news and the content being too negative were among the top reasons given for this, said Daryl Hansberry of Deloitte, which carried out the research.

There was also a significant amount who felt that it wasnt making them feel good about themselves along with a small, but still significant, amount who were experiencing bullying or harassment, he said.

Mr Hansberry added that the findings of the report were timely, given the Governments recent announcement of the establishment of a new Media Commission.

Deloitte's Digital Consumer Trends report also asked people about their smart device usage habits on the whole. On a day-to-day basis, smartphones were comfortably the most used device at 94%.

79% used a smart TV, 69% used a smartwatch, 65% used a laptop, 60% used a desktop computer, 56% used a voice-assisted smart speaker, 53% used a tablet such as an iPad, 50% used wireless headphones or earphones and 32% used an eReader such as a Kindle. Just under one-third (31%) used a games console.

Phone usage

As regards phone usage itself, 29% admitted to looking at their phone more than 50 times each day, increasing to 37% among 18 to 24s, while 12% said they check their smartphone over 100 times each day.

The report found that, on average, men check their phones 49 times per day, with women checking theirs 58 times per day.

74% of people said they check their phone within 30 minutes of waking up, with 37% checking it within five minutes.

The Covid-19 pandemic also changed the ways in which Irish people used their smart devices in 2021.

Unsurprisingly, online shopping for items other than groceries saw the biggest uptick in the past two years, with 33% of people saying they do this more now than they did pre-pandemic.

Elsewhere, 29% of people said they streamed more films or TV series now than they did before, and 28% said they used online banking more.

Other specific reasons for device use that increased during the pandemic included:

Read more from the original source:

More than half of Irish people struggle to discern real news from fake news online - Irish Examiner

On 3 November, Howard Kaplan, a retired dentist from Israel, posted a British Medical Journal (BMJ) investigation to a private Facebook group. The article reported poor practices occurring at Ventavia, a research company contracted to run three trial sites for the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine.

The article brought record traffic to bmj.com, and was widely shared on Twitter. But a week later, Kaplan woke up to a message from Facebook. The Facebook Thought Police has issued me a dire warning, he posted. Facebooks independent fact-checker doesnt like the wording of the article by the BMJ. And if I dont delete my post, they are threatening to make my posts less visible If it seems like Ive disappeared for a while, youll know why. Other BMJ readers also reported problems sharing the story.

There are now around 300 fact-checking organisations across the world, many of them fledgling companies with small budgets. Facebook in particular bestows a great deal of authority upon its 80 third-party fact checkers. But our recent experience at the BMJ, an established global publication, is that fact-checking can be incompetent, irresponsible and capable of suppressing already fully sourced and peer-reviewed journalism.

As well as warning Kaplan and othersnot to share the story, the BMJ investigation was given a Facebook Missing Context label. (These warn that this information could mislead people.) Readers were directed to a fact check article by Lead Stories, one of seven companies contracted by Facebook in the US, whose tagline is debunking fake news as it happens. (According to an analysis last year, Lead Stories was responsible for half of all Facebook fact checks.)

Our investigation was based on dozens of documents, provided by an experienced clinical trial auditor-turned-whistleblower, Brook Jackson. But the Lead Stories article said that none of the flaws Jackson had identified would disqualify the data collected from the main Pfizer vaccine trial. Quoting a Pfizer spokesperson, it said the drug company had reviewed an anonymous complaint and that actions were taken to correct and remediate: Pfizers investigation did not identify any issues or concerns that would invalidate the data or jeopardize the integrity of the study, it concluded. Lead Stories identified no factual inaccuracies in the BMJs article but consistent with Facebooks policy of combating misinformation over Covid-19, the platform reduced the articles distribution.

When the BMJ asked Lead Stories to remove its article and the missing context label, pointing out errors in its own post (including describing the BMJ as a news blog), Lead Stories declined. Its editor, Alan Duke, told the BMJ that the missing context label was created by Facebook specifically to deal with content that could mislead without additional context but which was otherwise true or real Sometimes Facebooks messaging about the fact checking labels can sound overly aggressive and scary. If you have an issue with their messaging you should indeed take it up with them as we are unable to change any of it. Duke added that the article was being shared by anti-vaccine activists, even though it did not suggest that the overall findings of the Pfizer trial had been skewed.

The BMJ wrote an open letter to the Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, appealing the rating. Zuckerberg didnt respond, but Lead Stories did. (It is an irony not lost on us that Nick Clegg, head of global affairs and communications at Meta, Facebooks parent company, is the grandson of Hugh Clegg, editor-in-chief of the BMJ from 1946 to 1965.) In a new blog post, the fact checkers cast doubt on our whistleblowers credibility, saying that Jackson was not a lab-coated scientist and that her qualifications amounted to a 30-hour certification in auditing techniques. (Jackson has more than 15 years experience in clinical research coordination and management.) Lead Stories added that Jackson did not express unreserved support for COVID vaccines, pointing to two tweets posted after the BMJs investigation. One criticised a Sesame Street episode in which Big Bird gets a Covid vaccine; another approved a US court ruling against mandating vaccination for federal employees.

Should Facebook compel anyone to express unreserved support on any one issue? Gary Schwitzer, adjunct associate professor of public health at the University of Minnesota and publisher of HealthNewsReview, which grades US news organisations health reporting, told us: Its absolutely immaterial to the topic at hand. For it to be in this independent review, I think says more about the reviewer than the reviewee. Schwitzer told the BMJ the processes by which Facebook decides what gets fact-checked, and the contractors systems for deciding which pieces they review are not transparent or consistent enough.

[See also: Its the tech giants, not socialist politicians, who are coming for our liberty]

On 20 December, Lead Stories posted a series of inflammatory tweets criticising the BMJ and Paul Thacker, the author of the investigation. One said: Hey @bmj_latest, when your articles are literally being republished by a website run by someone in the Disinformation Dozen perhaps you should be reviewing your editorial policies instead of writing open letters. (The article had been republished outside the BMJs licence terms on an anti-vax site; the journal asked the site to take it down.)

When the BMJ appealed directly to Facebook, it was told: Fact checkers are responsible for reviewing content and applying ratings, and this process is independent from Meta. Metas Oversight Board, which last year removed Donald Trump from the platform, refused to consider the BMJs appeal, saying that fact checking labels arent something the Boards decisions currently cover.

So, in the absence of anything else, it is left to users to debate the fact checkers. Jillian York, director for international freedom of expression at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told the BMJ: I worry about the amount of power placed in the hands of these third-party groups While I do see a role for fact-checking and think its far superior to the alternative which is Facebook just taking down content I still worry about the effect that it can have on legitimate sources.

Allowing fact checkers to take an editorial position is a concern for journalism more widely.Companies like Facebook and some of the traditional media establishments are reasonably concerned about vaccine misinformation, York said. But they have swung so far in the opposite direction as to potentially shut down legitimate questions about major corporations like Pfizer. The medical industry has a history of suppressing certain information, she added; it is important that journalists can question it. The BMJ is making a final appeal to Metas Oversight Board, but for now its investigation remains obscured on Facebook.

The unanswered question, according to the BMJs editor-in-chief Kamran Abbasi, is: why is Facebook doing this? What is driving its world view? Is it ideology? Is it commercial interests? Is it incompetence? And in the future, who can readers trust: journals like the BMJ, a reputable publisher since 1840, staffed by doctors, journalists, technical editors and statisticians or Facebook and its fact checkers?

Rebecca Coombes is head of journalism at the BMJ. Madlen Davies is the journals investigations editor.

Sign up for The New Statesmans newsletters Tick the boxes of the newsletters you would like to receive. Morning Call Quick and essential guide to domestic and global politics from the New Statesman's politics team. World Review The New Statesmans global affairs newsletter, every Monday and Friday. The New Statesman Daily The best of the New Statesman, delivered to your inbox every weekday morning. Green Times The New Statesmans weekly environment email on the politics, business and culture of the climate and nature crises - in your inbox every Thursday. This Week in Business A handy, three-minute glance at the week ahead in companies, markets, regulation and investment, landing in your inbox every Monday morning. The Culture Edit Our weekly culture newsletter from books and art to pop culture and memes sent every Friday. Weekly Highlights A weekly round-up of some of the best articles featured in the most recent issue of the New Statesman, sent each Saturday. Ideas and Letters A newsletter showcasing the finest writing from the ideas section and the NS archive, covering political ideas, philosophy, criticism and intellectual history - sent every Wednesday. Events and Offers Sign up to receive information regarding NS events, subscription offers & product updates.

Follow this link:

In trying to tackle fake news, Facebook is cracking down on real science - The New Statesman

Lucknow: The assembly elections in Uttar Pradesh this time are going to be held in many respects. Due to Corona, the powerful means of publicity has been left only on social media. Due to the election commission's ban on rallies, social media has now become a weapon to campaign and create an atmosphere. Who is trending where, which event will polarize the vote in the public. Such efforts are being made.

Amidst all these efforts, the challenge for the UP Police has also increased. Since the code of conduct came into force, more than 700 cases have been reported on social media, in which more than 150 cases have even had to be registered by the police. The challenge of fake news through social media for the police is increasing day by day. Recently, a 2-year-old video of Etah, in which a child is being beaten up by police officers. By calling that old video a fresh video, questions have been raised on the functioning of the UP Police and the state government. When the social media of the UP Police found out the reality of the viral video, the case turned out to be 2 years old. The UP Police has informed this on social media from the handle of its UP police fact check.

The DGP headquarters has started a social media monitoring cell with 10 policemen to deal with those who disturb the electoral atmosphere on social media. But in view of the ever-increasing complaints, today more than 40 policemen have been deployed in this cell to keep an eye on every platform of social media. The UP Police has also appealed to the public to use the Twitter handle of @uppolicefact Check to check the veracity of any picture, video that is going viral on social media.

Uproar over Muslim University, CM Dhami and Harish Rawat came face to face

Owaisi's MPs protest against Maharashtra govt's new liquor policy

Arvind Kejriwal's big announcement - these farmers will get compensation soon

Excerpt from:

Be Aware! Fake news spreading in UP elections, more than 700 cases found - News Track English

According to a report published in the Indian Express, the Director Generals of several Central Armed Forces were not invited to the Republic Day Parade this year. However, this turned out to be misleading information because all of the DGs were invited to the Parade, and several of them attended the event.

The report read, The DGPs of the BSF, CRPF, CISF, ITB, and SSB were not invited to the Republic Day parade. The omission is perceived as a snub to the one odd million personnel of the central forces. The claim appeared in an opinion piece titled Why PM Modi wasted no time in installing Netajis statue by Coomi Kapoor, where it was added under the section titled Not Invited.

However, this claim has turned out to be false, as several CAPFs have refuted the report and informed their chiefs were invited to the parade and they have attended the same.

This misinformation was first countered by the Twitter handle of Central Reserved Police forces (CRPF). It tweeted The information published in @IndianExpress that DG CRPF was not invited to Republic Day Parade is not just incorrect but also ill intended and insulting to the Force. Shri Kuldiep Singh, DG CRPF, was invited to the Republic Day Parade which he attended.

Similarly, Indo-Tibetan Border Police also refuted the claim. The CAPF said that DG ITBP was invited & attended the Parade. ITBP also added that it was for the 1st time that the Janbaz bikers of ITBP displayed a brave show at the parade.

It is notable that DG ITBP Sanjay Arora also has the additional charge of SSB. Therefore, even though SSB has not issued any statement regarding the Indian Express report, their chief was invited to the parade and he had attended the same.

Central Industrial Security Force tweeted to inform that the Indian Express report was fake. It said that DG CISF Sheel Vardhan Singh was invited to the 73rd Republic Day parade at Rajpath, New Delhi, and he attended the same. The information published in news paper stating that DsG of CAPF were not invited at the Republic Day Parade 2022 is incorrect, CISF said.

BSF has not responded to the report yet, but given that the DGs of all other CAPFs were invited to the parade and they attended the same, it can be said with reasonable certainty that DG BSF was also invited.

After the individual CAPFs refuted the report, Indian Express removed the Not Invited section from the article. It added an Editors note saying The last item in this article titled Not invited was incorrect and has been removed. The error is regretted.

It should be mentioned that Indian Express has been accused of disseminating fake news and promoting misinformation on countless occasions.

Very recently, when PM Modis convoy was blocked in Ferozepur Punjab and his security was breached, The Indian Express reported that Khalistani slogans were raised by the BJP workers near the Ludhiana DCs office. The truth, however, was far from the catchy headline that IE had picked. Conversely, IEstated in the same article that the slogans raised by BJP activists were Khalistania da yaar Channi Murdabad (friend of Khalistanis, Channi Murdabad) and Attwadian nu panah den wala Channi Murdabad (one who host terrorists, Channi murdabad). PM Modis convoy was blocked when he was heading towards Hussainiwala in Ferozepur district of Punjab to visit the National Martyrs Memorial and subsequently address a public meeting.

More:

Indian Express spreads fake news, CAPFs refute its report that their DGs were not invited to Republic Day parade - OpIndia

Scorpions players went on social media to express their disappointment on their current situation in Cameroon, saying that they were stuck, disrespected and devalued in Cameroon.

According to them, they could not accept the situation anymore, noting that they wanted to go home and return to their various clubs.

We cannot accept this. There is no respect for us. The public needs to know about the truth. They (the NCC) are telling the public so much fake and untrue news about our return, said Ebrima Sohna, Scorpions midfielder, who went live on Instagram.

He added that the people should have known that what was said was fake news immediately when they didnt see them (players) in Banjul on Monday at 3 p.m. as scheduled.

We understand a lot of people went to the airport on Monday. This is where they started telling lies to people. We as players did not even know when we were returning or coming back to Gambia. So why are they telling people that we are coming home when we as players didnt even know when we were coming back?

Lamin Jallow, the Scorpions winger, said that they didnt see or receive the $10, 000 match bonuses promised to them.

Our round of eight match money is still not given to us. We are sacrificing for our country The Gambia. We are dying for the colours of the country. We are doing this for the country, our children and the next generation, he said.

According to him, this has really made them angry, noting that they gave so many lies to their clubs.

There are fines already being made to some of us (the players). I have accepted mine and will pay it when I return.

He continued: They told us that we will go and have our flight. We were told that we will go and see the Gambian leader, Adama Barrow. We went down and packed our bags but we didnt see anything. This should stop. Football is being run by money. If we dont have money it is better we stop playing football.

This is very sad. Some other nations that were eliminated before us all went home and their players returned to their clubs. This is very sad.

Our club director called me and I have been telling lies to him because I have no choice. Players are here, some of them return to their clubs. Let no one go to the airport because there are not many of us here. There are about 15 players remaining here. Some of the players returned to their clubs on Monday because they are supposed to play on the weekend while some of them got injured and needed to go for treatment.

Modou Barrow: They are not honest to us. We dont know when to go home. Our clubs are calling us and we dont know what to say. We are tired of this and tired of lying to our clubs.

Sulayman Marreh: This situation is very sad. Players dont deserve this. Some Players have already left and this is very unprofessional and its too much now.

Modou Jobe Toldo: As the boys said, this is whats happening. We are all very discouraged.

Muhammed Mbye said: They are doing this as one team. The difficulties have been too much. We are stuck here in Cameroon and we cannot go home. These people are disrespecting us too much.

We always sacrifice for our own country but still there is no respect. We always suffer too much.

Tom Saintfiet, Gambias coach also said that the situation was frustrating, noting that they wanted to go home.

Bakary Y. Badjie, chairman of the National Coordinating Committee (NCC) reacted to the players comments and their situation in Cameroon in an interview with Gambian journalists in Cameroon, saying that it was very unfortunate that they were delayed for about 24 hours.

We were supposed to leave here (Cameroon) 48 hours after our elimination which was on Monday. By arrangement, we were supposed to leave Cameroon on Monday, but unfortunately the company that was contracted to do the services failed us. Just to set the record straight. This has nothing to do with the government, the Gambia Football Federation (GFF) or the National Coordinating Committee (NCC). Yes, we take the responsibility as NCC that is responsible for the coordination of all the arrangements.

The minister of Youth and Sports, Bakary Badjie has now confirmed that they were scheduled to leave Cameroon 8:20 p.m. on Tuesday, yesterday, adding that it was nobodys intention to be delayed on their return.

Reacting to the players comments, Minister Badjie said: It was unfortunate that one or two players are complaining about match bonuses. I dont know what match bonuses they are talking about. We never told the public how much players are paid or given match bonuses.

He added that each player should be paid 2500 for every match that they win, according to the Bonus Scheme. He said that players were paid 2500 each in all the matches they won.

When they qualified for the round of 16. They were each paid 6500. We dont owe them and I dont even know why that is an issue. The only thing that I think maybe they are talking about is the $10, 000 that we said.

The $10, 000 was very clear. I was not even here. I was in Banjul. But the president told me that the players want to know how much we are going to compensate them from the $1.175 million that CAF will give if they get to the quarterfinal. And we consulted before announcing. We have consulted and we have agreed that we are going to give each player $10, 000 from the money that CAF is going to give for reaching the quarterfinal.

This is simple. You dont exit from a competition and CAF draws a cheque. Instead, they wait until when the tournament is over and maybe they (CAF) will take a month or two before transferring the money to the GFF.

He added that he doesnt understand why the players are talking about the $10, 000 promise when they know that the money is supposed to come from CAF.

I felt so disappointed that the players knew exactly what the $10, 000 is about but yet they still decided to bring it as an issue, he said.

Meanwhile, according to Bakary Y. Badjie, the Scorpions and the Gambian delegation arrived in Banjul around 11 p.m. last night.

Read the original here:

Gambian players hit out at NCC for giving fake news to Gambians As players expressed disappointment at their situation in Cameroon - The Point - The...

To be clear, existing research has found that conservatives have a greater tendency toward misinformation than liberals do. For example, during the 2016 election, individuals who leaned conservative were more likely to engage with and share disinformation on Twitter and Facebook. Likewise, in the early months of the pandemic, conservatives were more likely to believe Covid-19 was a hoax, and to downplay the virus severity.

However, given that conservatism historically has been associated with respect for tradition, authority and social institutions, we reasoned that ideology alone might not explain the spread of fake news. We decided to investigate the role personality traits might play, focusing our research on conscientiousness the tendency to regulate ones own behavior by being less impulsive and more orderly, diligent and prudent. Our presumption was that conservatives with lower levels of conscientiousness would be more inclined to spread fake news, and that there would be no difference between highly conscientious conservatives and their liberal counterparts.

We tested these hypotheses across eight experimental studies with a sample size of more than 4,600 participants in total. In each study, participants reported their political ideology and responded to several questions evaluating their tendency toward conscientious on a five-point scale. They then were exposed to a series of fake and real news headlines a mix of neutral, conservative or liberal-leaning in their news content and asked to indicate their willingness to share those news stories with other people.

We found that low-conscientiousness liberals, high-conscientiousness liberals and high-conscientiousness conservatives each expressed willingness to share fake news articles to a similar relatively small degree. LCCs stood out: On average, they were 2.5 times more likely to share misinformation than the combined averages of the other three groups. In other words, it was the combination of conservatism and low conscientiousness that resulted in the greatest likelihood to share misinformation.

We also wanted to understand what, exactly, drives LCCs to spread misinformation. So, in one of the studies, we asked participants to report their leanings on a range of potential influences: level of support for Trump, time spent on social media, distrust of the mainstream media, and endorsement of conservative social and economic values. To our surprise, none of these factors was a reliable predictor of LCCs elevated tendency to share false news stories.

Instead, using statistical analysis, we found that the only reliable explanation was a general desire for chaos that is, a motivation to disregard, disrupt, and take down existing social and political institutions as a means of asserting the dominance and superiority of ones own group. Participants indicated their appetite for chaos by using a scale to express how much they agreed with statements like, I think society should be burned to the ground. For LCCs, we concluded, sharing false information is a vehicle for propagating chaos.

Can LCCs be prevented from sharing falsities? One of the most common measures for combating misinformation is using accurate messaging or fact-checker interventions, which have been shown to reduce the sharing of misinformation. Unfortunately, in two studies, we found that fact-checking warnings were inadequate: LCCs continued to share fake news stories at a higher rate compared with liberals and high-conscientiousness conservatives, despite being told the news was inaccurate.

This is a concerning finding. At the same time, our research overall suggests a path forward. First, those seeking to combat false information online can now target their interventions toward a smaller subset of the population: LCCs. More targeted approaches have been shown to be effective in influencing individual behavior in the past.

Second, our research makes clear that anyone trying to reach LCCs needs to experiment with interventions that go beyond fact-checking. We believe the onus falls primarily on social media companies. There is plenty of evidence that a users personality and political ideology can be inferred based on their social media activity. If these companies can identify LCCs, that means they can also be proactive in making sure LCCs are presented with reliable information, and not with falsities.

Misinformation is a serious threat to American democracy that deserves serious attention. But we should be smart about how we go about combating the spread of fake news stories. While our research doesnt provide all the answers, it can help to narrow the focus of these efforts and, in the process, should divert blame away from those conservatives who arent sharing misinformation.

Originally posted here:

We Found the One Group of Americans Who Are Most Likely to Spread Fake News - POLITICO

Each week, in a partnership with Correctiv, Exberliner will bring some piece of fake news that has been circulating online - and the corresponding fact check.

For our first, we have some online misinformation about the power outage which hit on January 9 in East Berlin.

So what happened? It is true that a massive power cut left around 50,000 houses without electricity and hot water for 16 hours, starting on Sunday Jan 9, lasting through the night and into Monday - while temperatures outside were just 3 degrees.

However, shortly after news of this power outage spread, misinformation began to spread online, much of it seeking to blame the outages on a single cause: the closure of Germanys nuclear power plants and the move towards green energy.

Take this indicative tweet from Frank L which reads:

Power outages are increasing in Germany ... the beginning of a completely wrong energy policy. Which party understands this?

The reference point for these remarks is the closure of three nuclear power plants which were taken offline on New Year's Eve, representing half of Germanys nuclear energy production. The inference drawn by much of the online misinformation is that a move towards green energy and the closing of nuclear power plants is likely to cause chaos acrossGermanys power grid.

However, according to Correctivs investigations, in none of the power outages, either on January 9 or in other power outages around that time (in Hamburg on January 7, or the Hochtaunuskreis on January 8) did the lack of electricity play a role. All of the power cuts were due either to bad weather conditions or technical problems like outdated equipment.

But this hasnt stopped the fake news spreading. On January 9, Steffan Kotr, member of the Bundestag for the AfD, wrote that we should fear an increase in such incidents, again implying the cause was the planned transition to green energy. He did not provide any evidence for this.

Despite the noise online, there is no sign that a green energy transition will lead to more blackouts, and the number of power faults has fallen in the period from 2006 to 2020.

In other fake news this week: were sorry to report that no, Bill Gates and Boris Johnson will not be charged at the International Criminal Court. Fingers crossed fornext time.

Read the original here:

Fake news of the week: The Berlin power cut - EXBERLINER.com