5 ms·

Those allegations are pretty serious. I am curious why the NAACP isn't calling for an all out boycott, rather than just a one day boycott.

by kop316 8y ago

labster 8y ago
Because all of the activists out there use FB, so they wouldn't know how to organize people without it.
- sterlind 8y ago
  It's hard to find an alternative that's discoverable. Planning happens through Facebook groups and demonstrations are events. The friction is low - it's easy to invite people and everyone already has accounts - and events are discoverable and even suggested. What's my alternative? Convincing all my friends to switch to Mastodon and check it regularly? and getting them to convince their friends? Does Mastodon even have events? Some of them only have have phones; is it simple to get them registered and using the app? Facebook is simply too entrenched.
  - ryacko 8y ago
    They could launch a minority-owned social media company.
    - arthur_pryor 8y ago
      that does not sound like a realistic course of action for a resource constrained group whose primary mission is not technology development. a minority group should not have to deal primarily with people in that group just to be treated fairly while making their way in society.
    - ikeyany 8y ago
      The NAACP is an advocacy group, not a tech company. Don't you think it's ethical for Facebook to change here?
    - bobthepanda 8y ago
      You could even say it's separate but equal.
      - bobthepanda 8y ago
        Apologies for not taking Poe's law into account, but it takes a serious lack of self-awareness to suggest that the organization responsible for the integration of the American public sphere should self-segregate.
        Dylan16807 8y ago
        The comment you replied to didn't say anything about segregation. And don't say it was implied. Plenty of people of all races would be happier using a social network where the founders care significantly about discrimination.
        vict00ms 8y ago
        The phrase "separate but equal" is a literal reference to segregation.
        Dylan16807 8y ago
        You're misreading. There are two comments in a row by bobthepanda. The accusation is that ryacko's comment was suggesting segregation. That's what I disagreed with.
        bobthepanda 8y ago
        Or, we could have all social networks legally mandated to care about discrimination using the power of law and punitive fines. There's no reason to let the existing ones carry on as is. Historically black colleges were an alternative to colleges that discriminated, but that didn't make them a solution for discrimination in education.
        ryacko 8y ago
save_ferris 8y ago
my guess is that they're trying to appeal to a broader audience by making the call-to-action less "costly" to users. The fact is that the general public won't care about any of this because the utility of these platforms is worth far more to them than the scandals. I really hate that this is the truth, but almost every time I talk about this with someone who still uses Facebook, they hesitate to even think about deleting their account because of the FOMO.
ars 8y ago
They forgot to boycott WhatsApp. Anyway, do you know what Facebook did here? The article only mentions Russia doing something.
- kop316 8y ago
  It links to another article that articulates it more.
  - tareqak 8y ago
    Here is the other article: https://www.axios.com/senate-reports-russian-interference-2016-election-9d0daca6-1e2d-4617-9295-f8eec61c1719.html https://www.axios.com/senate-reports-russian-interference-20... .
  - ars 8y ago
    I read the linked article and it articulates nothing. It has info about Russia, but nothing about what Facebook did wrong.
    - isoskeles 8y ago
      Facebook created itself, allowing Russia to use it to do bad stuff.
- FakeComments 8y ago
  A bunch of black people were successfully targeted by foreign intelligence agencies seeking to tap their racial angst to undermine the US, and now are trying to blame other people for that happening. Because examining why they were ready to believe such narratives, or why the black community in particular was targeted, would raise uncomfortable questions for the NAACP.
  - rak 8y ago
    One of the main points of the boycott is that the Black community was targeted through misinformation campaigns with the goal of supporting voter suppression. That's how they were targeted. That wouldn't be uncomfortable questions at all for the NAACP.

Those allegations are pretty serious. I am curious why the NAACP isn't calling for an all out boycott, rather than just a one day boycott.

by kop316 8y ago

Those allegations are pretty serious. I am curious why the NAACP isn't calling for an all out boycott, rather than just a one day boycott.

labster 8y ago

Because all of the activists out there use FB, so they wouldn't know how to organize people without it.

sterlind 8y ago
It's hard to find an alternative that's discoverable. Planning happens through Facebook groups and demonstrations are events. The friction is low - it's easy to invite people and everyone already has accounts - and events are discoverable and even suggested. What's my alternative? Convincing all my friends to switch to Mastodon and check it regularly? and getting them to convince their friends? Does Mastodon even have events? Some of them only have have phones; is it simple to get them registered and using the app? Facebook is simply too entrenched.
- ryacko 8y ago
  They could launch a minority-owned social media company.
  - arthur_pryor 8y ago
    that does not sound like a realistic course of action for a resource constrained group whose primary mission is not technology development. a minority group should not have to deal primarily with people in that group just to be treated fairly while making their way in society.
  - ikeyany 8y ago
    The NAACP is an advocacy group, not a tech company. Don't you think it's ethical for Facebook to change here?
  - bobthepanda 8y ago
    You could even say it's separate but equal.
    - bobthepanda 8y ago
      Apologies for not taking Poe's law into account, but it takes a serious lack of self-awareness to suggest that the organization responsible for the integration of the American public sphere should self-segregate.
      - Dylan16807 8y ago
        The comment you replied to didn't say anything about segregation. And don't say it was implied. Plenty of people of all races would be happier using a social network where the founders care significantly about discrimination.
        vict00ms 8y ago
        The phrase "separate but equal" is a literal reference to segregation.
        Dylan16807 8y ago
        You're misreading. There are two comments in a row by bobthepanda. The accusation is that ryacko's comment was suggesting segregation. That's what I disagreed with.
        bobthepanda 8y ago
        Or, we could have all social networks legally mandated to care about discrimination using the power of law and punitive fines. There's no reason to let the existing ones carry on as is. Historically black colleges were an alternative to colleges that discriminated, but that didn't make them a solution for discrimination in education.
        ryacko 8y ago

save_ferris 8y ago

my guess is that they're trying to appeal to a broader audience by making the call-to-action less "costly" to users. The fact is that the general public won't care about any of this because the utility of these platforms is worth far more to them than the scandals. I really hate that this is the truth, but almost every time I talk about this with someone who still uses Facebook, they hesitate to even think about deleting their account because of the FOMO.

ars 8y ago

They forgot to boycott WhatsApp. Anyway, do you know what Facebook did here? The article only mentions Russia doing something.

kop316 8y ago
It links to another article that articulates it more.
- tareqak 8y ago
  Here is the other article: https://www.axios.com/senate-reports-russian-interference-2016-election-9d0daca6-1e2d-4617-9295-f8eec61c1719.html https://www.axios.com/senate-reports-russian-interference-20... .
- ars 8y ago
  I read the linked article and it articulates nothing. It has info about Russia, but nothing about what Facebook did wrong.
  - isoskeles 8y ago
    Facebook created itself, allowing Russia to use it to do bad stuff.
FakeComments 8y ago
A bunch of black people were successfully targeted by foreign intelligence agencies seeking to tap their racial angst to undermine the US, and now are trying to blame other people for that happening. Because examining why they were ready to believe such narratives, or why the black community in particular was targeted, would raise uncomfortable questions for the NAACP.
- rak 8y ago
  One of the main points of the boycott is that the Black community was targeted through misinformation campaigns with the goal of supporting voter suppression. That's how they were targeted. That wouldn't be uncomfortable questions at all for the NAACP.