A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
The poll in question asked readers if they believed the woman's death to be caused by suicide, murder, or an accident.
Grisly nature aside, I fail to see what's to gain from this sort of interaction. Is it simply to give readers another layer of interaction outside of a comment box?
This is the best summary I could come up with:
As The Guardian reports in its own recounting of the incident, the article that Microsoft re-published on its MSN news portal focused on the death of a young 20-something woman in Sydney, whose body was found at the school where she worked as a water polo coach.
In a letter sent to Microsoft president Brad Smith that the newspaper quoted, Guardian Media Group CEO Anna Bateson said the debacle was not only potentially upsetting to the family of the young woman, but that it also poses "significant reputational damage" to The Guardian and the journalists who wrote the article.
"This is clearly an inappropriate use of [generative AI] by Microsoft on a potentially distressing public interest story, originally written and published by Guardian journalists," Bateson wrote in her letter to Smith.
Bateson also demanded Microsoft explain how it plans to compensate its news partners when it uses their intellectual property "in the training and live deployment of AI technologies within your wider business ventures."
In a statement provided to Futurism, a Microsoft spokesperson said that the company has deactivated its poll feature and is "investigating the cause of the inappropriate content."
"A poll should not have appeared alongside an article of this nature," the spokesperson continued, "and we are taking steps to help prevent this kind of error from reoccurring in the future."
The original article contains 461 words, the summary contains 219 words. Saved 52%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Unsurprisingly, police are considering the case as a possible murder — but the classless poll still questioned whether readers thought the woman had died by suicide, murder, or accident. Beneath the question, a disclaimer that the poll was part of the company's "insights from AI" somehow made the tasteless poll even more egregious.
Here's the part about the actual poll.