美國人寫信給聯邦通訊委員會，談論電視、谷歌和facebook上的“假新聞”

針對《哥倫比亞新聞評論》的喬納森·彼得斯（Jonathan Peters）提出的《資訊自由法》要求，聯邦通訊委員會公佈了自2016年10月以來收到的關於“假新聞”的少量投訴。...

針對《哥倫比亞新聞評論》的喬納森·彼得斯（Jonathan Peters）提出的《資訊自由法》要求，聯邦通訊委員會公佈了自2016年10月以來收到的關於“假新聞”的少量投訴。

不出所料，彼得斯分享的大多數投訴（來自FCC提供的40批投訴）都是關於有線新聞網路的自由偏見：

“All news stati*** must be censored or fined when they continuously lie, obfuscate and misdirect intentionally. The most egregious of these is CNN, but ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC et al are equally guilty…”

其他一些人指出福克斯新聞的事實錯誤，這也不足為奇。更有趣的是，這些投訴中有多少涉及到了FCC完全沒有許可權的資訊釋出者。

例如，私營報紙：

“The Mainstream Media news outlets are obviously trying to undermine our President and our nation by inundating the public with fake news, misleading stories, and one-sided biased interviews and spokespeople. It is most apparent on CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, and PBS, but also print media like the New York Times and Washington Post.”

國家詢問者：

“…no one can tell me why they are contractually obligated to display fake news immediately adjacent to the cashier. Their only resp***e is that it makes them money, people demand it. I can give full details in e-mail”

假新聞網站：

“My 75 year old father told me about this site and the memory boosting pill Bill Gates touted in Forbes. I explained it was a fake news site. Why is this not regulated?”

谷歌的搜尋結果：

“There are several editorials that are not clearly marked as such that the mainstream news networks such as CBS and NBC then air on their various news programs as if it is news and not opinion.”

和Facebook：

“…Mark Zuckerberg was a Hillary fan and in the beginning of the presidential race, Trump used to get 10,000 likes an hour while Hillary got a few thousand? Towards the end, Trump would get a few hundred a day and Hillary would get thousands. Zuckerberg donated $17 million to Hillary which I call collusion and c***piracy and if she won, my belief he would have control of the Internet. There was and is endless fake news on FB. Much of it made up against Trump by FB, Hillary and the democratic party. I really feel that the FCC needs to investigate Face Book & Zuckerberg and drain that swamp.”

雖然投訴的數量很少，但值得註意的是，美國人似乎不知道該和誰談論網際網路。

你可以在這裡檢視彼得斯的完整報告，但他指出，聯邦通訊委員會回應了大多數投訴，解釋社會媒體和非廣播有線新聞不屬於其管轄範圍。在某些情況下，申訴人被指向聯邦貿易委員會或州消費者保護局。

很奇怪，Facebook在美國主要新聞網路中排成一排，儘管近一半的美國成年人在那裡得到了他們的訊息，這無疑有助於解釋這一點。正如彼得斯指出的，投訴意味著消費者認為“假新聞”是**應該負責解決的問題，無論發生在哪裡。

其中一項投訴還認為，Facebook“阻止他們選擇的任何人”的能力在刑事上是不公平的，這對另一個大眾對社交媒體網路定位的誤解不屑一顧。顯然，Facebook和Twitter都是私人公司——它們沒有法律義務在自己的平臺上無條件地為任何人提供位置，它們也不對傳播到那裡的資訊的管理機構負責。如果你對他們中的任何一個有意見，聯邦通訊委員會的人都不會對此採取太多行動。