Scientific information has been blocked by Facebook

Facebook prefers to temporarily censor scientific information from very credible sources rather than tolerate harmful publications for too long, while seeking to improve its algorithms that cannot detect sarcasm.

Agence Science-Presse, a 43-year-old non-profit media outlet, had an article deleted on March 28 “for non-compliance with community standards.”

The situation was corrected only after three weeks (see table).

The article pointed out that the anti-vaccine movement had been using the same arguments for more than a century.

Explanations

“Meta prefers to remove a post that is not harmful and reinstate it two days or two weeks later, rather than leaving a (harmful) one for too long,” said a spokesperson for Facebook’s parent company.

The explanation leaves the editor of the Agency skeptical, “considering the quantity of fake news accounts that have been denounced over the years around the world and have remained online,” says Pascal Lapointe.

The first line of verification of posts on Facebook uses an algorithm that uses artificial intelligence. Disputed cases are then reviewed by an employee.

The D^r Vadeboncoeur recently had four of his posts censored by Facebook. “The first two were slightly ironic. It would be interesting to know how they suspend people who always have a speech that could not be more straight in the direction of science, ”says the D^r Vadeboncoeur.

“The challenge for artificial intelligence is often to be able to detect sarcasm. The algorithms are not yet strong enough to understand that the D^r Vadeboncoeur uses humor or sarcasm. That’s why the human comes to the second level of verification, “replied the spokesperson for Meta.

The D^r Vadeboncoeur recognizes that irony can be difficult to detect. But this loophole would have a major impact on the hunt for fake news. “It amounts to no longer being able to denounce an erroneous image or publication,” he thinks.

And if he understands the precautionary principle mentioned by Facebook to first block publications and then analyze them, the one followed by 50,000 people believes that the multinational could act differently.

Solution

Pascal Lapointe of Agence Science-Presse argues for regulation of algorithms. “It is opaque and abnormal that we — the D^r Vadeboncoeur and many others — let’s be stuck without understanding why. These companies have achieved a power over information around the world that has no equivalent in history,” he believes.

3 WEEKS WAITING

March 28: Facebook pulls the news from Agence Science-Presse. The Agency contacts Facebook, which the employee cannot do anything about.

March 29: The Agency is republishing its news.

March, 31st : the news is withdrawn again.

1^er april : the Agency contacts a Facebook executive, Kevin Chan, and explains the situation to him.

April 4: The leader transfers the agency to the Director of Media Partnerships.

April 8: Without news, the Agency insists with the customer service which accepts “exceptionally” to refer to its superior.

April 14: The agency again contacts Facebook and the two leaders.

April 20: The situation is restored.