Oh, blah dee blah. This is not the crux of the debate, regarding what Facebook gets wrong about the internet. The problem isn't the decision criteria, for wha

Oh, blah dee blah. This is not the crux of the debate, regarding what Facebook gets wrong about the internet. The problem isn't the decision criteria, for what's fair or foul within the confines of the company's policies, as reconciled with the general realities civilization confronts. The truth is that, on some level, Facebook, as a simple matter of being a communication system, as ordinary as any telephone call, provides enough rope for you to hang yourself with. We all know this, and so do they. The idea for those operating the platform, is to build an anticipatory prediction of who might being tying nooses, either for themselves or others, and perhaps do something about the key player's actions. In order for that principle to work, in some cases, it means letting bad things happen, or perhaps staging the appearance of bad incidents without real consequence. Meanwhile, The Problem with Facebook, is that it is a hyper-reality, airbrushed according to individual preferences. As such a hosting platform for arbitrary input, of nearly unbounded scope. Without reliable turing tests, based on real externalities, there's no way to discern bot garbage and provocateurs from the expressions of true believers. If Facebook were to reveal its secrets for discerning and differentiating between intentionally deceptive content and de novo factual information, it would effectively default on the very same cat-and-mouse game of discovering the noose tyers. So this congressional hot seat and court of public opinion is simply a dog and pony show. Facebook will continue as usual, until a generation ages out, rendering it the new AOL, and fizzling into irrelevance. At some point new technologies will grab the limelight, distract us all, and we'll pretty much forget about all the fuss of Trump and Facebook, just like we've mostly forgotten about Reagan and MTV.