[Ed. – This is behavioral conditioning, among other things. If it’s not in the “shared set of facts,” it must not be “trustworthy.” By this criterion, 99% of scientific advances over the last 6,000 years would have been prevented due to the untrustworthiness of non-shared “facts.” Facebook calls it ranking trustworthiness, but all it really is is a propaganda effort to train you to accept Facebook’s decrees about trustworthiness.]
“I think in January, many of you are aware that Mark announced three principles that drive this work. We want to support quality news that is trusted, informative, and local or personally relevant to you,” she continued. “Today, unfortunately, we know that trust in the media is low and polarization is a real concern. So we want to make sure we are valuing and supporting the publishers that people trust. Our goal here is to expose people to news that is broadly trusted by members of diverse groups, so that people have access to a shared set of facts. So to understand which news sources are broadly trusted, we survey a diverse and random representative sample of people on our platform, and in these surveys we ask people two questions.”
“First, how familiar they are with the source, and then second, how much they actually trust that news source,” explained Hardiman.