5 ms·

Clickbait is just a conspicuous example of a more general problem: sensational and scaremongering news there is no conceivable benefit in knowing. This category

Clickbait is just a conspicuous example of a more general problem: sensational and scaremongering news there is no conceivable benefit in knowing. This category encompasses most political news, and the daily litany of misery, crime and terrorism that fills the headlines. I think FB should filter it all out, and stop news organizations lining their pockets by making us unhappy.

gedrap 10y ago
It's just that it's very hard to determine what's 'wrong' and what's not, other than very extreme cases and even then you might disagree. Banning some media because you don't consider right/worthy/beneficial/whatever doesn't help with free speech at all. Imagine someone banning Justin Bieber music because it's not 'worth listening', or banning some books because they have no value. That's a bit absurd.
- sevenless 10y ago
  The way Facebook chooses articles for its feed has no effect on anyone's free speech. Comparing it to banning books is silly.
  - JackuB 10y ago
    This always depends on which receing end you are. If your book/blog/status is being _hidden_ by newsfeed, then you'll be screaming for freedom of speech and fairness in how people see their newsfeed and to let them decide what is worthy of their attention.
  - thoughtPolize 10y ago
    "Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks" [0] "Was it funded by the US army? First the university said yes" it's US led information warfare [1] [0] http://www.pnas.org/content/111/24/8788.full http://www.pnas.org/content/111/24/8788.full [1] https://www.theguardian.com/science/head-quarters/2014/jul/01/facebook-cornell-study-emotional-contagion-ethics-breach https://www.theguardian.com/science/head-quarters/2014/jul/0...
- tedmiston 10y ago
  He did say filter, and not ban. To me that implies it's still accessible, but perhaps hidden by default for my user.
- rhizome 10y ago
  Lots of companies "ban" Justin Bieber, in that there are lots of places he and his music are not found.
cortesoft 10y ago
People obviously want to read it, because they click on it.
- TeMPOraL 10y ago
  People obviously also want heroin, because if you give it to them, they'll take it and ask for more. Heroin induces desire for a harmful substance by exploiting the chemistry of our brains. News platforms induce desire for harmful information by exploiting cognitive biases and heuristics.
  - cortesoft 10y ago
    This is true... but what do we do about it? Outlaw click-bait? That will work even worse than outlawing heroin has.... at least heroin is fairly easy to define and identify. Click-bait is such a nebulous term, that anyone can classify articles they think are vapid and pointless as click-bait, while someone else might find it informative and interesting.
CPLX 10y ago
This strikes me as a uniquely Californian point of view.

gedrap 10y ago

It's just that it's very hard to determine what's 'wrong' and what's not, other than very extreme cases and even then you might disagree. Banning some media because you don't consider right/worthy/beneficial/whatever doesn't help with free speech at all. Imagine someone banning Justin Bieber music because it's not 'worth listening', or banning some books because they have no value. That's a bit absurd.

sevenless 10y ago
The way Facebook chooses articles for its feed has no effect on anyone's free speech. Comparing it to banning books is silly.
- JackuB 10y ago
  This always depends on which receing end you are. If your book/blog/status is being _hidden_ by newsfeed, then you'll be screaming for freedom of speech and fairness in how people see their newsfeed and to let them decide what is worthy of their attention.
- thoughtPolize 10y ago
  "Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks" [0] "Was it funded by the US army? First the university said yes" it's US led information warfare [1] [0] http://www.pnas.org/content/111/24/8788.full http://www.pnas.org/content/111/24/8788.full [1] https://www.theguardian.com/science/head-quarters/2014/jul/01/facebook-cornell-study-emotional-contagion-ethics-breach https://www.theguardian.com/science/head-quarters/2014/jul/0...
tedmiston 10y ago
He did say filter, and not ban. To me that implies it's still accessible, but perhaps hidden by default for my user.
rhizome 10y ago
Lots of companies "ban" Justin Bieber, in that there are lots of places he and his music are not found.

cortesoft 10y ago

People obviously want to read it, because they click on it.

TeMPOraL 10y ago
People obviously also want heroin, because if you give it to them, they'll take it and ask for more. Heroin induces desire for a harmful substance by exploiting the chemistry of our brains. News platforms induce desire for harmful information by exploiting cognitive biases and heuristics.
- cortesoft 10y ago
  This is true... but what do we do about it? Outlaw click-bait? That will work even worse than outlawing heroin has.... at least heroin is fairly easy to define and identify. Click-bait is such a nebulous term, that anyone can classify articles they think are vapid and pointless as click-bait, while someone else might find it informative and interesting.

CPLX 10y ago

This strikes me as a uniquely Californian point of view.