3 ms·
A (possibly dumb) question which might not have an exact answer: Facebook is always asked to stop the divisive nature and curb the misuse of the platform. As a
by ankit219 8y ago
A (possibly dumb) question which might not have an exact answer:
Facebook is always asked to stop the divisive nature and curb the misuse of the platform. As a techie, we all know how hard it is. A problem made even more complex by different places, regions, cultures, languages, norms, customs and so on. Facebook has been accepting of its mistakes and defensive. A real drawback is that they are using the same language of curbing/stopping as the ones used by the media outlets.
Question is: What if someone flips the algorithm to show positive news only or show feed not based on interest (to drive engagement) but based on what relaxes a person. Especially in sensitive regions like these? Facebook would end up losing more users, by the very nature of humans who would find another medium to do what they are currently doing. So, this will not be a permanent solution, but would make the separatist people find other ways.
I get this does not curb fake news. But what this can do is stop taking people on the roller coaster of emotions, especially in sensitive areas. When people are emotional, they do not care about the opposite viewpoint, or even how radical their actions could be.
If this is dumb, please tell me. If not, why are people not talking about it?
- throwaway8879 8y agoYou are making the assumption that Facebook actually cares about a solution to this - whether it be the curbing of fake news or the real-life consequences from runaway political extremism and divisiveness that it's platform leads to. Facebook cares about making money, and only cares just enough to react to recent bad press because bad press means less money.
- netsharc 8y agoMichael Moore discussed TV news in Bowling for Columbine: scary news glues eyeballs to TV sets, and glued eyeballs are better for ads. So probably by accident Facebook ended up with the same system. Not just scary, I'd wager emotional stuff drives up engagement (imagine a political argument of people screaming "YOU'RE WRONG!") , and Mark and Jack could probably hear the kaching of those ad views. Also how screwed up is the media landscape in the USA. Political news, and then ads for political candidates. In 2008 the media kept blaring about the "tight race" between Obama and Clinton, and then later on between Obama and McCain. Hmm, were they being honest or did they want to keep eyeballs glued to sell ads? Also political ads?