4 ms·

> It's one of the reasons why political ads are so bland and content-free: they don't want to make any claims that could be evaluated as true or false. I keep

> It's one of the reasons why political ads are so bland and content-free: they don't want to make any claims that could be evaluated as true or false. I keep getting mailings in Ohio indicating that if I sign a petition to put a certain issue on the ballot The Chinese Will Know Where I Live And Come Get Me. It's a completely idiotic campaign, and of course, it's all blatant lies. (similar ads appear on television) This place you're living sounds relatively pleasant though.

skybrian 7y ago
Direct mail is entirely different. The campaign doesn't need anyone's prior permission to do it, and it might not even be sent by the campaign.
- AnimalMuppet 7y ago
  Then, is Facebook the newspaper, or is it the mail (in terms of how it should have to treat political ads)? j-c-hewitt thinks it's the newspaper. But why that and not the mail? Note well: I'm not saying that Facebook should be treated like the mail rather than the newspaper. But, given that they can target ads to individuals, that aspect seems more like the mail, at least to me.
  - rocqua 7y ago
    Facebook advertisements are a public forum. Moreover, there is an intermediary party that can exercise review. Direct mail is not a public forum. Moreover, who would accept or reject a direct mailing campaign?
    - AnimalMuppet 7y ago
      How are Facebook ads a public forum? They send an ad to the viewer of a page. They can, and do, control viewer-by-viewer who sees which ads. That's like sending an ad to a mailbox. But I wish I could reject direct mail campaigns...
      - justizin 7y ago
        many of them are promoted posts, with discussion, and which are re-shared by individuals to their network.
        AnimalMuppet 7y ago
        OK, but that's like you got something interesting in the mail (or even email), and forwarded it to someone. That's still not a public forum.
    - 18pfsmt 7y ago
      We are going to wreck FB within 5 years with something far less centrally controlled, and you want to waste government resources on this? The company is 15 years old. Math doesn't work that way or bitcoin would be toast.
  - Balgair 7y ago
    Zuck's best way to 'wash his hands' of it is to adhere closer the newspaper standard. Though, if he does this, it may mean less money.
TallGuyShort 7y ago
Honestly if a lie that blatant even needs to be censored, then I think we can just say democracy is a failure. What concerns me are the lies / truths that depend very much on values and biases that would get caught out because of Facebook's own biases or people gaming the system.
- justin66 7y ago
  > Honestly if a lie that blatant even needs to be censored, then I think we can just say democracy is a failure. The problem with what you are saying is, if we accept that there can be any curbs on free speech at all, "how could anyone be stupid enough to believe that?" is not a useful guiding principle for setting the threshold at all. The classic example of speech that is not covered by the First Amendment is crying "fire!" in a crowded theater. Of course it's rather crazy for everyone to trample each other trying to escape a fire that does not exist when they do not even smell smoke. That is completely beside the point. We govern the speech based on the damage it does, the intent to do damage, and the utter lack of any redeeming qualities to the speech.
  - TallGuyShort 7y ago
    FYI, the example of shouting "fire!" in a crowded theater comes from a case against someone who was claiming that drafting people into the military was involuntary servitude, and was illegal and worth resisting. I think they should have been allowed to say that.
    - justin66 7y ago
      Oh, I should have chosen a different example! I certainly think the argument that we cannot censor based on whether or not someone would be a bit foolish to believe the lies being spread still stands, but I'll leave it for now. (Although I believe I share the OP's sentiment that the whole thing is not a sign that democracy is in great shape...)
- eloisius 7y ago
  I agree. I feel like creating the illusion of a disinformation-free platform will only weaken peoples' ability to discern it. Taiwan has a hands-off strategy for dealing with it for that reason [1]. 1: https://cpj.org/blog/2019/05/qa-taiwans-digital-minister-on-combatting-disinfor.php https://cpj.org/blog/2019/05/qa-taiwans-digital-minister-on-...

skybrian 7y ago

Direct mail is entirely different. The campaign doesn't need anyone's prior permission to do it, and it might not even be sent by the campaign.

AnimalMuppet 7y ago
Then, is Facebook the newspaper, or is it the mail (in terms of how it should have to treat political ads)? j-c-hewitt thinks it's the newspaper. But why that and not the mail? Note well: I'm not saying that Facebook should be treated like the mail rather than the newspaper. But, given that they can target ads to individuals, that aspect seems more like the mail, at least to me.
- rocqua 7y ago
  Facebook advertisements are a public forum. Moreover, there is an intermediary party that can exercise review. Direct mail is not a public forum. Moreover, who would accept or reject a direct mailing campaign?
  - AnimalMuppet 7y ago
    How are Facebook ads a public forum? They send an ad to the viewer of a page. They can, and do, control viewer-by-viewer who sees which ads. That's like sending an ad to a mailbox. But I wish I could reject direct mail campaigns...
    - justizin 7y ago
      many of them are promoted posts, with discussion, and which are re-shared by individuals to their network.
      - AnimalMuppet 7y ago
        OK, but that's like you got something interesting in the mail (or even email), and forwarded it to someone. That's still not a public forum.
  - 18pfsmt 7y ago
    We are going to wreck FB within 5 years with something far less centrally controlled, and you want to waste government resources on this? The company is 15 years old. Math doesn't work that way or bitcoin would be toast.
- Balgair 7y ago
  Zuck's best way to 'wash his hands' of it is to adhere closer the newspaper standard. Though, if he does this, it may mean less money.

TallGuyShort 7y ago

Honestly if a lie that blatant even needs to be censored, then I think we can just say democracy is a failure. What concerns me are the lies / truths that depend very much on values and biases that would get caught out because of Facebook's own biases or people gaming the system.

justin66 7y ago
> Honestly if a lie that blatant even needs to be censored, then I think we can just say democracy is a failure. The problem with what you are saying is, if we accept that there can be any curbs on free speech at all, "how could anyone be stupid enough to believe that?" is not a useful guiding principle for setting the threshold at all. The classic example of speech that is not covered by the First Amendment is crying "fire!" in a crowded theater. Of course it's rather crazy for everyone to trample each other trying to escape a fire that does not exist when they do not even smell smoke. That is completely beside the point. We govern the speech based on the damage it does, the intent to do damage, and the utter lack of any redeeming qualities to the speech.
- TallGuyShort 7y ago
  FYI, the example of shouting "fire!" in a crowded theater comes from a case against someone who was claiming that drafting people into the military was involuntary servitude, and was illegal and worth resisting. I think they should have been allowed to say that.
  - justin66 7y ago
    Oh, I should have chosen a different example! I certainly think the argument that we cannot censor based on whether or not someone would be a bit foolish to believe the lies being spread still stands, but I'll leave it for now. (Although I believe I share the OP's sentiment that the whole thing is not a sign that democracy is in great shape...)
eloisius 7y ago
I agree. I feel like creating the illusion of a disinformation-free platform will only weaken peoples' ability to discern it. Taiwan has a hands-off strategy for dealing with it for that reason [1]. 1: https://cpj.org/blog/2019/05/qa-taiwans-digital-minister-on-combatting-disinfor.php https://cpj.org/blog/2019/05/qa-taiwans-digital-minister-on-...