3 ms·

Right now there's zero insight but anecdotally I have been hearing from multiple content creators that they've reported huge engagement drops and their audience

Right now there's zero insight but anecdotally I have been hearing from multiple content creators that they've reported huge engagement drops and their audience claim to be randomly unsubscribed and not see their content in the curated newsfeed. I see this very often myself on Facebook. There are some politically oriented pages whose content I almost never see on my newsfeed, and I try to nudge the algorithm to change it by engaging with the posts directly on the page - still no luck. Meanwhile pages I am not interested in, liked by others, are able to show up frequently in my newsfeed. So the general public sort of already knows if something shady is going on, particularly when it's blatant. Regulation just means they have to do something about it, to make it a fair platform or transparently unfair.

18pfsmt 7y ago
Nobody is forcing you to use FB or Google, and I have all their domains null routed at my firewall. However, you do not get to use the government to force your preferred terms of doing business on them. That is the definition of authoritarian. It's akin to nationalizing a company's valuable assets. Even China was able to just ban them (i.e. choose not to do business with them), and try to steal their tech instead. The US government will not stand for this intellectual property theft, even if it's done through legislation.
- fareesh 7y ago
  The US government has investigated things like Russian activity on social media and the media refers to it as "hacking the election". There was a whole Cambridge Analytica scandal about it. If the dismissive view of "nobody forced those people to use social media" and "the government should not force preferred terms" arguments were generally favored then none of those incidents would have been treated the way they were. It is already the mainstream view that that the US government play some role in "securing elections", which means ensuring that social media platforms are not "taken advantage of" by biased interests as they allegedly were in 2016.
  - 18pfsmt 7y ago
    You honestly do not have any knowledge of the Federalist Papers (they represent arguments supporting the Constitution), nor the Constitution itself. I do not think you have the courage to make these claims in Denver, nor Farmington, NM. I will say what I'm saying IRL in either place (which is why I'm within HN guidelines). I'll pay for your ticket and pick you up at the ABQ (or DEN airport, with enough notice). America is about liberty, not race or anything else, We have the smartest and most ambitious people from around the world, from all countries. We do not care about "blood and soil" people.

18pfsmt 7y ago

Nobody is forcing you to use FB or Google, and I have all their domains null routed at my firewall. However, you do not get to use the government to force your preferred terms of doing business on them. That is the definition of authoritarian. It's akin to nationalizing a company's valuable assets. Even China was able to just ban them (i.e. choose not to do business with them), and try to steal their tech instead. The US government will not stand for this intellectual property theft, even if it's done through legislation.

fareesh 7y ago
The US government has investigated things like Russian activity on social media and the media refers to it as "hacking the election". There was a whole Cambridge Analytica scandal about it. If the dismissive view of "nobody forced those people to use social media" and "the government should not force preferred terms" arguments were generally favored then none of those incidents would have been treated the way they were. It is already the mainstream view that that the US government play some role in "securing elections", which means ensuring that social media platforms are not "taken advantage of" by biased interests as they allegedly were in 2016.
- 18pfsmt 7y ago
  You honestly do not have any knowledge of the Federalist Papers (they represent arguments supporting the Constitution), nor the Constitution itself. I do not think you have the courage to make these claims in Denver, nor Farmington, NM. I will say what I'm saying IRL in either place (which is why I'm within HN guidelines). I'll pay for your ticket and pick you up at the ABQ (or DEN airport, with enough notice). America is about liberty, not race or anything else, We have the smartest and most ambitious people from around the world, from all countries. We do not care about "blood and soil" people.