4 ms·

Yeah, no. The reasons that those other systems failed has nothing to do with this particular issue. People will still be able to share their bullshit to like

Yeah, no. The reasons that those other systems failed has nothing to do with this particular issue. People will still be able to share their bullshit to like minded people to their hearts' content, which is how the vast majority of information gets shared through facebook. All facebook is saying is that they will not take money from these bullshit mills. The vast majority of people couldn't care less about whether Breitbart gets to advertise on facebook. They aren't going to uproot their presence there to make a political point, either. Most of the people on the site who hold those views are 50+ year olds who want to see photos of their grandchildren. They can still get all the nonsense they want by watching Fox News in the evening, which is their preferred method anyway.

ctdonath 9y ago
Imputing & dismissing a large fraction of your audience, or friends of your audience, as "deplorable" is not a wise marketing move. They may be 50+, they may watch Fox News, but they consider Breitbart a canary in the coalmine, and may prove quick to throw their not-inconsiderable weight behind cheesy non-sequitur upstart quietly years in the making.
- MisterBastahrd 9y ago
  Again: grandparents aren't going to abandon a website en masse, a website they use primarily to view photos of their families, just because they certain ads are not being shown. Not stories. Not shared posts. Ads. They will still get all the ads they want to their hearts content from right-wing sources should those companies buy ad space, it just won't be from knowingly bullshit sources. Breitbart? No. Rebel Media? No. WSJ? Yes. The Hill? Yes. It's not difficult to understand, and it isn't going to change anyone but a handful of nutball's facebook habits. There's no alternative platform in this space that isn't app-first, which eliminates it from consideration for generations that are and will continue to be desktop-first.

ctdonath 9y ago

Imputing & dismissing a large fraction of your audience, or friends of your audience, as "deplorable" is not a wise marketing move. They may be 50+, they may watch Fox News, but they consider Breitbart a canary in the coalmine, and may prove quick to throw their not-inconsiderable weight behind cheesy non-sequitur upstart quietly years in the making.

MisterBastahrd 9y ago
Again: grandparents aren't going to abandon a website en masse, a website they use primarily to view photos of their families, just because they certain ads are not being shown. Not stories. Not shared posts. Ads. They will still get all the ads they want to their hearts content from right-wing sources should those companies buy ad space, it just won't be from knowingly bullshit sources. Breitbart? No. Rebel Media? No. WSJ? Yes. The Hill? Yes. It's not difficult to understand, and it isn't going to change anyone but a handful of nutball's facebook habits. There's no alternative platform in this space that isn't app-first, which eliminates it from consideration for generations that are and will continue to be desktop-first.