RE: meeting summary

Here are the notes I took:

1) Sandro has created a GitHub repo for discussion of corroboration-based strategies between meetings: https://github.com/w3c/cred-claims 
2) On fact-checking sites, links should be provided to the Web pages where the claims appear.
3) Jon suggested that identifiers should be associated with each claim, for referencing by both supporters and detractors.
4) Sandro noted Facebook will want to elevate information that has been verified but not claims that have been debunked.
5) Sandro suggested the reputation of claim checkers should be treated separately from the validity of the claims themselves.
5) Facebook warns users when they are about to post links to information that has been debunked.
6) Facebook is also rating the trustworthiness of users:  https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2018/08/21/facebook-is-rating-trustworthiness-its-users-scale-zero-one/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.e4d9dc4fdecc 
7) Facebook provides information about publishers.
8) Certification logos on websites are easily gameable.
9) Stuart pointed out that AP distributes but doesn't own or verify content.  However, AP could verify that publishers are who they say they are, as members of AP.
10) Sandro suggested the URLs of AP members could be used as trust marks.
11) Scott indicated that's essentially what he plans to do.

I documented in StratML format the mission, vision, values, goals and objectives of Scott's project, at http://stratml.us/drybridge/index.htm#CCC2 or, more specifically, http://stratml.us/carmel/iso/CCC2wStyle.xml, as well as those of The Coral Project, at http://stratml.us/drybridge/index.htm#TCP or, more specifically, http://stratml.us/carmel/iso/TCPwStyle.xml

The Trust Project's plan was already in the StratML collection, at http://stratml.us/drybridge/index.htm#TTP or, more specifically, http://stratml.us/carmel/iso/TTPwStyle.xml

BTW, on the XForms call this morning, I learned of discussion at the Balisage conference about forming a new XML organization since the W3C doesn't seem to be interested in working on it anymore. https://www.w3.org/community/xformsusers/ & https://www.balisage.net/  As a first step, a mailing list will be established.

Owen


-----Original Message-----
From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> 
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2018 3:27 PM
To: Credible Web CG <public-credibility@w3.org>
Subject: meeting summary

Good discussion today, ranging over several topics around the agenda items.  We didn't really scribe it, but instead agreed to share the machine transcription (with all its errors - it should be ready soon) and to make the video recording available to known & active participants who missed this meeting.  If that's you, let me know and I'll share it with you.  You can treat it like a podcast.

Also, here are the points that stuck out the most for me:

* Creating an ecosystem of claim sightings

   - Various things one might do in this space are intermixed and folks
     on the call weren't always thinking of the same things

   - It would be nice for end-users to be able to request that
     particular claims appearing in a story be fact-checked, or that
     the fact-checks be linked if already done.  Perhaps users could
     vote for this fact-checking with money.

   - Media outlets might participate in this and help bootstrap it
     (focusing early critical mass).  It would parallel the comment
     system.  Maybe coordinate with coralproject to try it out.

   - People would be more likely to request fact checks if they could
     see others and see theirs shared and were told how it fed into
     IFCN.  On the other hand, verification-requested could become a new
     kind of hostile comment or attack on the media.  Is Wikipedia's
     "Citation Needed" hostile?

   - It would be nice to see all the fact checks of a particular claim
     together, and it would help assess the quality of fact checking,
     and perhaps improve their trustworthiness.

* Creating an ecosystem of securely identified publishers (see unmasking)

   - It would help to have verified identities behind websites that
     want to be more credible, but we want it to be decentralized

   - AP membership could serve as a useful trust indicator for media outlets, and
     is an example of one more verification service

   - It would be nice if end-users and platforms had an easy and secure way
     to view the certificates/memberships of a site (something that's much
     more secure than the site choosing to put the logo on their page)

Hoping this is useful,

         -- Sandro

Received on Thursday, 23 August 2018 02:44:32 UTC