Advertisement

We need your help now

Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.

You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.

If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi at The Center for American Progress CAP 2019 Ideas Conference on Wednesday SIPA USA/PA Images

Explainer: Why is Facebook allowing a doctored video of 'drunk' US Speaker Nancy Pelosi to stay online?

The social media giant has been criticised after altered footage of Pelosi was posted online this week.

FACEBOOK HAS DEFENDED a decision to allow altered footage of US Speaker Nancy Pelosi to remain online, despite the company’s confirmation that it was manipulated.

The footage, which purports to show Pelosi slurring and stuttering during a speech, gained traction earlier this week after it was posted to the social media website.

It emerged amid a bitter public row between Pelosi and Donald Trump, which has seen the Democratic congressional leader trade insults with the US president over mental health.

But despite warnings that sophisticated video manipulation could form part of future disinformation campaigns in the US, the company has refused to remove it.

And while Google has announced it has removed the video from YouTube, Twitter has also allowed the video to remain on its platform.

It raises further questions around how much tech companies are facilitating the spread of fake news and whether they are serious about taking measures to prevent it.

Here’s how the story has unfolded.

The footage

On Thursday, it emerged that video footage purporting to show House Speaker Nancy Pelosi slurring her words was circulating widely across social media platforms.

The distorted video was based on real footage from a Center for American Progress conference in Washington the previous day.

It shows Pelosi claiming that Donald Trump was engaged with Russia in a cover-up regarding the result of 2016 US presidential election.

During her speech, Pelosi said that Trump was “obstructing justice” by refusing to cooperate with investigations by Democrats in Congress, according to satellite TV network C-SPAN, which published the original video online.

She also expressed hope that those close to Trump would stage an intervention “for the good of the country” and characterised the president’s actions as a potentially “impeachable offence”.

Congress Russia Probe Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer arrive to a press conference about a meeting with President Donald Trump at the White House on Wednesday morning J. Scott Applewhite / PA Images J. Scott Applewhite / PA Images / PA Images

By Friday morning, an altered version of the video had racked up millions of views.

One version posted on Facebook by conservative site Politics WatchDog has been viewed 2.3 million times, and was also circulating on YouTube and Twitter.

In the comment section of the post, Facebook users called Pelosi “drunk”, “a babbling mess”, and suggested she may have taken prescription drugs or suffered a stroke.

The slowed-down video was also shared by Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani on Twitter, although he later deleted the tweet.

Trump himself tweeted a separate Fox News video of Pelosi on Thursday, which appeared to have been edited to focus on sections of a speech in which she stuttered and mispronounced certain words.

Tweet by @Donald J. Trump Donald J. Trump / Twitter Donald J. Trump / Twitter / Twitter

Fake news

On Friday, The Washington Post reported on the spread of the video on Facebook, YouTube and Twitter, adding that the footage was appearing in the comments sections of message boards and regional news outlets.

It also claimed to have carried out an analysis of the distorted video which showed that it had been slowed down to a quarter of its original speed.

An analysis by AFP journalists also found it had been slowed to around 75 percent of its normal speed.

According to the Washington Post, the pitch of Pelosi’s voice had also been altered to disguise the fact that the video had been slowed.

“To possibly correct for how that speed change would deepen her tone, the video also appears to have been altered to modify her pitch, to more closely resemble the sound of her natural speech,” the report said.

However, while Facebook also announced that its third-party fact-checkers had identified the video “false”, it said the company would not remove the footage from its website.

False information policy

Rather than deleting the video, Facebook said it would “heavily reduce” its appearance in people’s news feeds.

The Washington Post quotes a statement from the company saying it had no rules against the posting of fake information on Facebook.

“We don’t have a policy that stipulates that the information you post on Facebook must be true,” the social media giant said.

US news network CNBC also quoted a Facebook spokesman as saying the company was trying to “find the right balance” between free expression and authenticity.

“Just because something is allowed to be on Facebook doesn’t mean it should get distribution,” the spokesman said.

“In other words, we allow people to post it as a form of expression, but we’re not going to show it at the top of news feed.”

The video has continued to be shared on Twitter, which did not comment when asked by multiple US news sources on Friday whether it would remove the footage.

However, YouTube (which is owned by Google) has removed the video from its platform after determining that edits to the original footage violated its terms.

“YouTube has clear policies that outline what content is not acceptable to post and we remove videos violating these policies when flagged to us,” a spokesperson for the company told CNBC.

“These videos violated our policies and have been removed.”

‘Anybody can do this’

While there has been limited action from social media companies on the fake Pelosi video, the footage raises concerns about the spread of misinformation.

Experts on “deepfake” videos claim that videos such as this showcase the potential of digitally altered videos to push fraudulent claims.

Hany Farid, a digital forensics expert at the University of California, told Associated Press that such videos are not difficult to create.

“It is not somebody using the latest technology,” he said. “Anybody can do this.”

He also said that the video is reminiscent of an altered video of CNN reporter Jim Acosta that was tweeted out by the Trump administration last year.

“What worries me is that these dumb fakes have whipped up the president, the White House, Giuliani and his supporters,” he said.

“What is going to happen when you get these sophisticated fakes?”

Democratic Senator Mark Warner also warned that without action from social media companies, the problem would be exacerbated.

He also told CNN that large platforms did not have sufficient procedures in place to address viral misinformation like the altered footage of Pelosi.

Mark Warner Mark Warner: concerned that problem is going to get worse SIPA USA / PA Images SIPA USA / PA Images / PA Images

“Viral misinformation is pushed today by simple Photoshop and video editing techniques, but new technologies are going to make this a heck of a lot worse,” he said.

If this story is anything to go by, those looking for a solution to the spread of fake news may be waiting on social media companies for some time yet.

With additional reporting from Associated Press and - © AFP 2019

Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone...
Our Explainer articles bring context and explanations in plain language to help make sense of complex issues. We're asking readers like you to support us so we can continue to provide helpful context to everyone, regardless of their ability to pay.

Close
40 Comments
This is YOUR comments community. Stay civil, stay constructive, stay on topic. Please familiarise yourself with our comments policy here before taking part.
Leave a Comment
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute mick h
    Favourite mick h
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 6:19 AM

    I think that this needs to be brought in to law and is long overdue. People do not take these sort of decisions lightly and it’s the alternative of a long, drawn out and painful death that drives them to this point. I believe that anyone who is facing an inevitable death through illness deserves the right to choose a dignified and far less painful means of passing. It’s far easier on the person who is suffering and on their loved ones – it’s just the humane thing to do.

    437
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Richard Cynical
    Favourite Richard Cynical
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 8:12 AM

    That headline alone shows what’s wrong with party politics. Vote for your favourite dictatorship.

    60
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Barry O 'Mahony
    Favourite Barry O 'Mahony
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 7:09 AM

    Doctors who ‘assist’ terminally ill patients not only face possible criminal prosecution but would also run the risk of being struck off the register.
    On the other hand as a veterinarian, failure to euthanase a terminally ill animal who is suffering from uncontrollable pain, could result in prosecution and/or being struck off.

    QED The law can sometimes be an arse.

    271
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Joe
    Favourite Joe
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 11:51 AM

    Does euthanasia not go totally against the Hippocratic oath?

    25
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Ugly Truth
    Favourite Ugly Truth
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 11:58 AM

    Not since the ‘practice’ needed more office space.

    5
    See 6 more replies ▾
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Aaron McKenna
    Favourite Aaron McKenna
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 12:04 PM

    As far as I’m aware, there’s nothing in the Hippocratic oath that specifically tells doctors they can’t help someone die. Indeed, an awful lot of the oath talks about treating a person, not a disease; and applying human compassion.

    If the oath was “Keep someone alive as long as possible” we wouldn’t have hospices where people go once a decision has been made that enough is enough. Plenty of people go into one, get big doses of morphine and slip away peacefully after long battles have been fought to their conclusion.

    58
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Le Tigre
    Favourite Le Tigre
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 12:57 PM

    “First do no harm”. It’s hardly harm to spare someone pain. You could say inaction is harmful

    56
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Paul Roche
    Favourite Paul Roche
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 12:58 PM

    Something something noxious substances…
    Anyone who googles the oath can see it’s not about killing people.

    6
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Matt Connolly
    Favourite Matt Connolly
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 1:58 PM

    There’s a fine line between positive steps with the purpose of ending a life – which is currently illegal, and the exception of accelerating death – i.e. “a terminally ill or dying person will receive adequate pain relief and palliative care, even if this treatment as a side-effect may contribute to the shortening of the individual’s life.” – which IS legal and is spelt out in the Medical Council’s guide to medical conduct.

    18
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Matt Connolly
    Favourite Matt Connolly
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 2:01 PM

    @ Aaron – you’re confusing personal autonomy and futile attempts to prolong life with assisted suicide – two distinctly different areas of law.

    13
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Shanti
    Favourite Shanti
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 3:56 PM

    Doctors no longer swear the Hippocratic oath. Some swear a duty of care oath, but many don’t swear any oath at all.

    They’re well aware that they’re on the hook if anything is done wrong, that’s a far bigger incentive than an oath.

    17
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Barry
    Favourite Barry
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 6:29 AM

    We’re a messed up society, we think it’s wrong to allow any animal to suffer before it dies and we’ll often opt to end things early to stop suffering for our pets.

    But as a country we have no problem letting one of our own species needlessly suffer before death, most of this is based on religions that claim that ending things early is “immoral”.

    So apparently the moral thing is to watch you’re loved ones suffer and to ignore their wishes, requests and wants to die with dignity.

    232
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Kal Ipers
    Favourite Kal Ipers
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 12:15 PM

    We aren’t really messed up. It is a complex issue that needs to be well thought out before implementation.
    I support the right to choose but there are valid concerns about it not being done for convenience.
    Would an elderly parent ask for euthanasia if they realised their care put their children in financial hardship?Ate into inheritance ?
    Would the children push for it? Is medication or illness effecting the decision making?
    I am glad we are in a society that wants to safe guard people and not allow the wrong thing for the right reason.

    32
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Marty Flood
    Favourite Marty Flood
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 11:58 AM

    Why not a referendum on this instead of the presidential age bullshit?

    179
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute stephen
    Favourite stephen
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 2:05 PM

    Great point Marty.

    43
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Joe O'Brien
    Favourite Joe O'Brien
    Report
    May 6th 2015, 11:48 AM

    Please no referendum. I’ve had enough of Iona & the god squad to last me a lifetime.

    8
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Mark O'Hagan
    Favourite Mark O'Hagan
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 6:57 AM

    The next pro-life crusade. Prolong life without regard for the wishes of the person’s dignity. Mere existence isn’t living.

    179
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Richard Cheney
    Favourite Richard Cheney
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 7:50 AM

    Exactly,another Crusade for David Quinn and Breda O’Brien trying to keep Iona relevant. They’ll probably roll out a skeleton with a ventriloquist and ask him ‘You didn’t want to die did you Mr.Bones?’ and then something about cultural Marxism.

    100
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute John Ryan
    Favourite John Ryan
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 12:46 PM

    I won’t be held responsible for my actions it her or her like come anywhere near this one.

    18
    See 2 more replies ▾
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Le Tigre
    Favourite Le Tigre
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 12:56 PM

    Since you mention it, where was the “pro-choice” vigil for Marie Fleming? Are only certain choices worth marching for?

    13
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute pongodhall
    Favourite pongodhall
    Report
    Sep 11th 2015, 3:15 AM

    It should be up to the individual and not to pro-life, doctors, lawyers etc.

    2
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Deborah Behan
    Favourite Deborah Behan
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 7:44 AM

    I would back this and vote for this. It should be a basic human right. I have watched 2 of my relatives die in absolute pain. One said to me “I’m having a very long death aren’t I”. That still haunts me.

    166
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Vanessa Fox O'Loughlin
    Favourite Vanessa Fox O'Loughlin
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 7:18 AM

    This is such an important case. Journalist Dave Kenny will be talking to Marie’s daughter Corinna and her ghost writer Sue Leonard about Marie’s remarkable life at Waterford Writers Weekend on 9th May if anyone wants to show their support in person.
    http://www.eventbrite.ie/e/an-act-of-love-the-marie-fleming-story-tickets-16035415359

    58
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Proinsias Ó Foghlú
    Favourite Proinsias Ó Foghlú
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 9:16 AM

    We really need to enact this law as soon as possible, but I expect the RCC to do all in their power to stop it from happening.

    If a person of sound mind has specifically requested it then I cannot see any valid reason for prolonging their life to suffer pain and indignity.

    50
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute helixjo1
    Favourite helixjo1
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 11:43 AM

    Can’t see any reason to argue against this.

    Though compassion can sometimes be over-ruled by lunacy in this country.

    It really is time we all started living in the 21st century and applying a little logic to these situations.

    41
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Joe O'Brien
    Favourite Joe O'Brien
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 11:40 AM

    If a candidate in Galway West supports this legislation, then I’ll happily give them my No.1 vote.

    37
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Philip Kenna
    Favourite Philip Kenna
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 8:20 AM

    Td’s break ranks! Pfffft! I’m afraid that with regards to this subject you will have to look after your own affairs discretely. The powers that be haven’t the mettle to tackle this in the race to get re elected. Sorry “TRY” to get re elected.

    33
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Denise Friary
    Favourite Denise Friary
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 6:07 AM

    Every one has the right to die in peace and if they didn’t broadcast their private business to the world then that would happen.

    32
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Derek Walsh
    Favourite Derek Walsh
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 10:37 AM

    Unfortunately, people’s right to die in peace is not recognised by the law, and people can be and have been prosecuted for helping someone to die peacefully even when they didn’t “broadcast” it. The culture of having laws that we allow people to ignore while authorities look the other way is not one we want to perpetuate or depend upon.

    70
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Jake Race
    Favourite Jake Race
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 12:00 PM

    Please, lets stop tolerating Irish solutions to Irish problems.

    34
    See 1 more reply ▾
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Le Tigre
    Favourite Le Tigre
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 12:55 PM

    That’s a meaningless cliche and we should stop tolerating it

    12
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Charliegrl80
    Favourite Charliegrl80
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 9:26 AM

    Well done Tom!!!!!!!!!!!!

    28
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Middle Class Cork
    Favourite Middle Class Cork
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 7:16 AM

    I agree with Tom Curran! I think TD’s have the right to die and the sooner the better.

    26
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute stephen
    Favourite stephen
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 2:11 PM

    I am in total favour of the right to die campaign, but having watched both parents and a sibling die of cancer related illness, I have to say they died with dignity with the help of the amazing hospice staff and the advance of pain killers. But I am not as brave if I have a terminal disease,I want the option to be euthanised.

    17
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Paul Roche
    Favourite Paul Roche
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 12:02 PM

    What an interesting little country we live in…
    The Supreme Court finds against a right to die – yet we can introduce one by legislation.
    The High Court refuses to recognise Same Sex Marriage, so we need a referendum – despite a constitutional bar to legislating for it.
    The Dáil is not permitted to debate TMFR – because of an AGs opinion that cannot be seen.
    This is why the bankers are laughing!

    12
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Paul Roche
    Favourite Paul Roche
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 9:29 PM

    Dammit that should be no constitutional bar to legislating…

    1
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Finn Mc Cool
    Favourite Finn Mc Cool
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 3:25 PM

    All the comments are just barking mad… Who says brainwashing doesn’t happen ?

    6
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Gerard
    Favourite Gerard
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 3:55 PM

    I have a problem with neither, but I can’t say I see the difference between “assisted suicide” and “euthanasia”.

    5
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Shanti
    Favourite Shanti
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 3:59 PM

    Euthanasia is where someone else decides to end your suffering – this is what happens with animals.

    Assisted suicide is where the person has asked to die. Meaning that it’s *their* intent, not the choice or intent of the assistant.

    16
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Gerard
    Favourite Gerard
    Report
    May 6th 2015, 6:01 AM

    But when we talk about euthanasia being legal elsewhere, it’s ALWAYS is as per your definition (for people).

    Anyway, hope he’s successful but I think his estimation of how many TDs are willing to defy the whip is wishful thinking at best.

    3
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Dermot O Reilly
    Favourite Dermot O Reilly
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 3:25 PM

    Is this Endas next big plan.

    Wipe out any person over 70 years?

    Is Enda sane?

    3
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Shanti
    Favourite Shanti
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 3:57 PM

    Where on earth did you get that from the article?

    10
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Paul Roche
    Favourite Paul Roche
    Report
    May 5th 2015, 9:30 PM

    Shanti,
    I know you’re in favour of what Kenny is doing, but he is a fascist.

    1
Submit a report
Please help us understand how this comment violates our community guidelines.
Thank you for the feedback
Your feedback has been sent to our team for review.

Leave a commentcancel

 
JournalTv
News in 60 seconds