Want to talk about "fake news" as it relates to Tech Industry

[IntoxicatedPuma]

See my title there? I could have tried to come up with a catchy title that could attract more clicks and views by saying "fake news is killing the industry" or "xxxx reporting delivers fake news"

I also could throw a bunch of he said she said nonsense into this to prove some point, but Journalism isn't about your opinion its about delivering facts. Journalism is supposed to be scientific, or as scientific as subjective commentary can be. By that I mean, you should be testing a hypothesis and finding out if your facts back that thesis. If they don't, make you shouldn't be labeling your thesis "The moon isn't real" because that was your original hypothesis, and then filling your thesis full of articles saying you were wrong.

To get more to the point, I want to show an example I came across today that annoys me a bit. It's an easy target, but I'm going to use something posted on WCCFtech.com.

Since it was posted, it has since been updated, but the update doesn't really fix the problem with the story.

http://wccftech.com/intel-playing-dirty-undercut-amd-ryzen/

"Intel Allegedly Playing Dirty To Undercut AMD’s Ryzen"

I would assume by reading this story, I am going to get full details on how Intel is trying to sabotage AMD with Ryzen. Not only sabotage, but do things that might not be legal or ethical. The article is quite long and lengthy, and if I wasn't so interested in this topic I probably would have just read it at face value and left it at that.

So let's see what this article says:

Intel is allegedly back to playing dirty in a deliberate attempt to cut AMD and its Ryzen CPUs out of the market. Reports alleged that Intel PR is gearing up for a response to Ryzen. With some reports claiming that Intel personnel may have even approached some customers with “incentive rebates” and other special promotions to exclusively use Intel chips. In some cases allegedly urging them to make big buying decisions before they could evaluate competing AMD products.

Intel Allegedly Sent A “Call us before you write” Email To Some Of The Press Reviewing Ryzen

10 years later, it seems that the more things change the more they stay the same. If recent reports are to be believed, Intel may be dipping its hand back into its little box of tricks.

The embargo on Ryzen reviews is expected to end on March 2nd. That’s when independent reviews are expected to go live. One report claims that Intel PR has sent a “call us before you write” email to some of the press reviewing Ryzen chips.

So here is the first problem. Intel is "allegedly" playing dirty tricks. The link they provide in the first report is an article about how AMD is worried that Intel could use its position and some not so nice tactics to push them out of certain markets. Problem is, even AMD doesn't provide any info that Intel is doing this. The 2nd article they cite simply says says absolutely nothing about Intel's tactics. Absolutely nothing. The third link is just another re-link to the first post. Quite bluntly, this is crap reporting and writing.

So far their first two sources in the opening paragraph do nothing to back this up. Next, they provide a link to an article which WCCFtech says is telling reviewers to contact Intel before they publish anything. Problem is, that article doesn't actually say any of that. Below it is an updated text saying that actually the person who wrote the article they cited didn't actually encounter this, they are just saying what others told them. Cool, now we have a source citing another source citing a source. A friend of mine knows a guy who says he has a buddy in Intel who said their manager told them they're going to cut prices in half. [/sarcasm]

The updated article says they got clarification that actually this is common practice for Intel and they have been doing this for years. Furthermore, Intel didn't actually threaten anyone or do anything, just said Ryzen is what they expected. Perhaps Intel requests "journalists" to contact them first so they don't publish nonsense and BS like this article in question? This is perfectly reasonable that Intel would have an interest in getting the full story out, rather than having someone post a hate rant about how much they hate Intel. Sadly, journalists should be doing this on their own initiative and it's quite sad that a company has to pressure journalists to do their job correctly.

So you could just say, well WCCFtech is kind of a trashy news site so just let it go. Except now Techpowerup is posting the same news.

They're citing a Tweaktown article, who is citing the same source that WCCFtech did. At this point all three of them are now guilty of the same thing. Reposting what others said and also not providing proof that the other person said that. At least they had the decency to point out that that person who told them wasn't actually told that and is just repeating what someone else said to them.......are you confused yet? I am.

I should go on a rant about this, but I think it should be at least fairly obvious to most that this is a problem. You can't post some nonsense and then quote someone else who posted the same thing.

I post this on here because I want better journalism in tech and not the nonsense we see in many of these "news" sites popping up. Anandtech, PCper, and Toms Hardware are all pretty good about not posting this kind of crap. I hold them to a much higher standard than others, and hope SFFn can deliver content to that level. I hope this post can bring awareness to the issue and make others aware how shoddy reporting can confuse and harm consumers with misinformation (even if the original title was true, the author has provided no proof of how it was true). I hope this post can bring awareness on this site of what we should expect from journalists and writers. It is unacceptable to post something as fact and say "I didn't know it wasn't true" or "Well someone else already told me." It's the journalists job to get to the truth and report a story accurately. I'm not saying to not use Techpowerup or WCCFtech, because I find some of their information to be useful, but remember that you need to dig through the crap and find out what is true. Hopefully those who post on this site can strive to provide unbiased and accurate reporting, find the source of the news and not just reposttwhat others said.

 

[Phuncz]

I've noticed the uptick in this too and it usually comes down to a few sites that seem to be 99,7% efficient clickbait-generators that spread FUD. The Intel price reduction theme is still doing its rounds on various sites and forums, but luckily a few people are also echoing this is not an official price reduction. It's just tabloid quality journalism, spread by people not reading what's really there or checking the facts.

I fear that that this is greater than just tech news, it's involving the world more and more each day with dictators in every continent spreading lies, eliminating opposition and covering up the truth. We as people should be critical of the information we're handed, it's our own responsibility to grade information according to what it's worth, if it can be verified and what its intent is.

 

[Kmpkt]

I think a big issue here is people don't seem to know how to identify shitty news, poor references and the like - namely a lack of critical thinking skills. As a case in point, one of my clients presented me with a website a couple of weeks ago that was taking a stand against vaccinations (ie. Anti-Vacc). I was assured that the people involved were all highly credentialled scientists and completely authorized to offer the best evidence possible on the subject. You can see the website here:

http://www.vaccinesrevealed.com

In line with what I was told, there we no fewer than six PhDs and over a dozen doctors credited as contributing experts for this documentary series. Of course I was suspicious and proceeded to quickly check the credentials of each of the PhDs. Of the six, two had a PhD in Computer Science, one had a PhD in Economics, one in Psychology, one in Biochemical Engineering in Plants and one with a PhD in public health. None of them had a PhD in anything any reasonable academic or healthcare practitioner would consider to be relevant enough to the field of vaccines to make them a specialist of any sort. Of the Doctors on the website, the vast majority of them were Chiropractors, Naturopaths and D.O.s. Obviously not meaning to offend anyone here, but none of these are regarded as professions of true standing amongst the bulk of the medical field (they often operate well into the realms of pseudoscience and quackery). Anyhow, my point is this - my patient is someone I consider to be an intelligent individual and they were very easily duped into believing these "experts". I think the problem with fake news lies partly with the individual's capacity to not accurately assess the face validity of what they're reading. If people were better at that, clickbait havens like Wccftech would probably be out of business (I wish). I personally did not receive good education on evaluation of the credibility of information sources until I was completing my Masters degree which is MUCH too late in the educational system to be exposed to this kind of critical thinking.

 

[Soul_Est]

Almost all technology journalism is now opinions dressed up as facts. Hence why places such as CNET, Engadget, IGN, Mashable, and The Verge still exist.

 

[Phuncz]

... which is MUCH too late in the educational system to be exposed to this kind of critical thinking.

This is important. In the information age, we should be thought much earlier (somewhere around 16-18 years old) that we need to evaluate information before taking it as truthful or accurate. Maybe then people wouldn't auto-click on random links in e-mail all the time.

 

[Soul_Est]

This is important. In the information age, we should be thought much earlier (somewhere around 16-18 years old) that we need to evaluate information before taking it as truthful or accurate. Maybe then people wouldn't auto-click on random links in e-mail all the time.

Even earlier (11-13 years old) would be best (along with a crash course in privacy and social media). Critical thinking cannot be thought but inspiring and motivating critical thinking is important (alongside resilience and creativity but that's for another thread).

 

[Kmpkt]

This is one of the most frustrating things about our education system (in Canada anyhow). My experience in school was spending lots of time learning stuff that was designated as base curriculum, but essentially amounted to university prep level education. In fact, I would say that the bulk of the grade 11 and 12 math and science curriculum in my home province of B.C. is completely inappropriate for the 90+% of people who are made to enrol that will never step foot near a university campus. I would really like to see the senior high school curriculum, and the entire curriculum really, offer a more practical and life-based course load than they do presently. I have three young daughters and as of right now feel like if I don't teach them critical thinking early and often, it might not happen.

 

[Kwirek]

Thing is, as soon as you become an expert at anything you quickly realize that journalists - with few exceptions - aren't. Many also seem to lack critical thinking one would expect from someone supposedly schooled at a university. I suppose it is part of the democratization of the profession, ie anyone can be a journalist, it doesn't signify anything anymore. It is not entirely bad, but it is also very dangerous when the flow of information isn't at all filtered through a mind trained with basic checks an balances before being trumped up as Truth.

I hope people will be taught to check sources in the americas, although I suppose it will be a generation before we see the fruit of it. But then again, we are/were taught it early here in Sweden - but most people seem to forget it right after class!

The reviews and editorials here are refreshing though since you are clear on what you are not experts at.

 

[Soul_Est]

This is one of the most frustrating things about our education system (in Canada anyhow). My experience in school was spending lots of time learning stuff that was designated as base curriculum, but essentially amounted to university prep level education. In fact, I would say that the bulk of the grade 11 and 12 math and science curriculum in my home province of B.C. is completely inappropriate for the 90+% of people who are made to enrol that will never step foot near a university campus. I would really like to see the senior high school curriculum, and the entire curriculum really, offer a more practical and life-based course load than they do presently. I have three young daughters and as of right now feel like if I don't teach them critical thinking early and often, it might not happen.

That is what I realized too late (I'm Canadian too). The education system in North America values the status quo above all else. A friend of mine wrote this wonderful piece and I responded with this:

This is an excellent piece. It really shows that you took the time to muse over it. You do not just point out what the issues are, but also take the time to show the various ways to solve them. I have discussed the issues with the current education system in North America with family and friends, much to my chagrin. The two points I always touch on are the educational system in Switzerland (http://swisseducation.educa.ch/en/swiss-education-system-5) and Isaac Morehouse's post on teaching people to ride bikes as the education system currently does for the skills one needs in their future career (http://isaacmorehouse.com/.../15/education-and-bike-riding/).

Thing is, as soon as you become an expert at anything you quickly realize that journalists - with few exceptions - aren't. Many also seem to lack critical thinking one would expect from someone supposedly schooled at a university. I suppose it is part of the democratization of the profession, ie anyone can be a journalist, it doesn't signify anything anymore. It is not entirely bad, but it is also very dangerous when the flow of information isn't at all filtered through a mind trained with basic checks an balances before being trumped up as Truth.

I hope people will be taught to check sources in the americas, although I suppose it will be a generation before we see the fruit of it. But then again, we are/were taught it early here in Sweden - but most people seem to forget it right after class!

The reviews and editorials here are refreshing though since you are clear on what you are not experts at.

This the unfortunate truth. For the number of us who are truly knowledgeable to be experts in our niches, there are 10+ people spreading misinformation about that niche and causing confusion and conflict all over. There is also the issue of ego and bias that prevades the technology media with leagues of supporters who lack critical thought and knowledge and will not develop them.

 

[Kmpkt]

That is what I realized too late (I'm Canadian too)

Where in Canada are you?

 

[Soul_Est]

Where in Canada are you?

Mississauga, Ontario (Malton to be exact).

 

[IntoxicatedPuma]

I have found quite often that I will be reading an article written by someone who doesn't seem to know what they are talking about. This person will have in their bio something impressive like "'Robert has a BA from USC and his Masters from Stanford University" - which sounds great until you look that person on LinkedIn or somewhere, and find out they have a Masters in Sociology and they are writing about Government tech regulation as if they are the expert. The problem is, even if I were to write an article about foreigners living in China, I cannot use myself as a source. It's unprofessional as an academic and as a journalist. I need to interview others and get the information from them. Sure, I might be able to throw in an anecdote about my own personal experience, but that is all it will be.

Sources damn you! get your sources straight! I had some good professors in college and if I didn't provide good sources they'd rip my paper apart with red ink. Even I provide lots of good sources, they will look at them carefully and usually give feedback:

ex: I wrote several papers on Polish history because I was very interested in it. Of course, many Polish sources are a bit......anti-Russian. My professor was fluent in Russian and of course quickly pointed out that I did not include any Russian sources. For Polish history it was extremely important, because Russia occupied Poland for a significant length in history, so having a Russian side of the story is also important. I would guess it is similar to a US history article might want to include British or Canadian perspective on the events.

To bring it back to the tech article in the original post - I think Intel is sending out letters to reviewers because they don't simply want a "AMD rules and Intel now sucks." Because it's not the case. AMD has a really good product, but it would be disingenuous to tell buyers that they should get AMD Zen right now. If benchmarks show that Intel CPU's still outperform AMD in frame rates for gaming, reviewers need to tell people that and provide the facts. They can't just say "AMD has higher raw performance" and then not bother to mention how it's only real world improvements is for video rendering and compiling code.

I have seen other articles that keep saying "intel is slashing prices!" and then showing the discounts at Microcenter. Anyone who knows anything about Microcenter knows that this is a long standing tactic. I purchased my i7 3770k for $259, and an i5 3350p for $159 from there. So their lower prices is nothing new. If Newegg, Amazon, and others start selling at that price......then we have a story.

 

[Soul_Est]

WCCTech is a clickbait site, period. A good portion of the "AMD rules and Intel sucks" are for two reasons:

1. Intel was involved in anti-trust practices in the early 2000's and priced high during latter of the Core years and
2. AMD screwed up badly with Bulldozer and has been the underdog for years

Ever since Bulldozer, the market has been "Intel rules and AMD sucks". AMD did their best to fact check after the fact but it was not enough. By Intel contacting reviewers, they will be seen (and rightfully so) as influencing the reviewers work. While I understand that Intel is worried, they should let the reviewers have their say and THEN correct them. That is the fair way to handle the situation.

 

[Ceros_X]

I enjoyed reading this a lot - good points all around. I would add that if you are depending on the school system of any country to teach critical thinking, you shouldn't. Hopefully it is taught in school but it should always be taught in the home at a very young age. I have a daughter and it will be something we constantly go over.

As to the Intel/AMD reviewer part, I don't see anything wrong. If Intel is asking for reviewers to contact them, so? Intel's primary job is to do good for share holders and look out for the company. While I would disagree with them trying to strong arm reviewers (which is speculated about and isn't even a source of a source thing) perhaps they want to check with reviewers to see what their review methodology is -- if they are utilizing benchmarking programs that favor one instruction set over another or whatnot. Reviewers can always tell them to pound sand. If I was Intel I'd want a sneak peak so I could start readying my counter argument to AMD. I don't see anything wrong with that, that's business.

I would also like to add that I enjoy the reviews here - a lot of honesty and I don't get the 'well I better say they are decent or people won't send me crap to review!' vibe I get on many other sites/magazines. Magazines especially, that is why all gun mags are shit.

(An example in journalistic handwaving would be gun magazines who review guns and then use 3 shot groups to demonstrate the accuracy potential of guns or ammo that is being reviewed. 5 shot groups are usually held to be the minimum for useful groupings while doing load development with 10 shot groups being the minimum threshold for measuring good accurracy. Super easy to cherry pick good three shot groups.)

 

[Soul_Est]

I'm sure @GuilleAcoustic will get a kick out of this. David Revoy, the creator of Pepper & Carrot, experienced this when he posted about version 0.92 of Inkscape breaking previous work. He then posted about version 0.92.1 of Inkscape fixing the issue and how much of the Internet did not comprehend the first post, especially the LinuxActionShow on episode 453 at 0:26:55. This really needs to stop.

 

[GuilleAcoustic]

I'm sure @GuilleAcoustic will get a kick out of this. David Revoy, the creator of Pepper & Carrot, experienced this when he posted about version 0.92 of Inkscape breaking previous work. He then posted about version 0.92.1 of Inkscape fixing the issue and how much of the Internet did not comprehend the first post, especially

David Revoy does a lot for the FLOSS graphic art and the promotion of Linux and FLOSS for professional. He also makes great tutorials and shares his brushes.

... especially the LinuxActionShow on episode 453 at 0:26:55. This really needs to stop.

No comment ...