7 ms·

Facebook head of news cofounded site critical of Elizabeth Warren

101 points by sandmansandine 7y ago

r00fus 7y ago
It's pretty clear over the past few months that Facebook has decided that it's going to support specific candidates and is abdicating it's role as a "communications medium" (Trump on the right, Buttigieg on the left). Their decision to accept paid lies (ads) by candidates (as opposed to Twitter) should tell us everything we need to know that FB views the targeted conspiracy-theory factually untrue bullshit - as a thing to be embraced (nay, not to avoid) - all for profit. Time will tell if they permit all such ads or only the ones that they prefer.
- ceejayoz 7y ago
  > Time will tell if they permit all such ads or only the ones that they prefer. This has already been answered. https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/29/tech/facebook-california-candidate-false-ads/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/29/tech/facebook-california-cand... > Adriel Hampton, a political activist, registered as a candidate for California's 2022 gubernatorial election on Monday so he could take advantage of Facebook's policy allowing politicians and political candidates to run false ads on the platform. > On Tuesday evening, a Facebook (FB) spokesperson told CNN Business, "This person has made clear he registered as a candidate to get around our policies, so his content, including ads, will continue to be eligible for third-party fact-checking." The rules will be enforced arbitrarily only when FB wants.
- stevenwoo 7y ago
  Breitbart being a trusted Facebook news source was kind of jaw dropping.
  - JungleGymSam 7y ago
    What's your take on CNN and MSNBC? Mother Jones? The Daily Kos? HuffPo? etc.
    - Miner49er 7y ago
      Are any of those confirmed to be included? AFAIK none of those are.
      - pandemicsyn 7y ago
        Not sure any of those are specifically - but Buzzfeed.news, People, Business Insider etc are listed on the landing page as a sources.
    - mikeyouse 7y ago
      Breitbart is an explicitly white nationalist publication. There is no comparison with standard news. https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2019/11/12/stephen-millers-affinity-white-nationalism-revealed-leaked-emails https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2019/11/12/stephen-mille... Edit: Good lord people. SPLC has a cache of emails from Stephen Miller written to various people at Breitbart about reporting their stories with explicit white nationalist ideology. You don't have to like SPLC to believe the leaked emails any more than you had to like Wikileaks to believe the leaked DNC emails. Here's another source if you don't want to give them clicks: https://www.thedailybeast.com/stephen-miller-pushed-racist-stories-to-breitbart-leaked-emails-show https://www.thedailybeast.com/stephen-miller-pushed-racist-s...
      - refurb 7y ago
        SPLC is not an authority on what’s white supremacy and what’s not. They’ve been known to cast a wide net.
        mikeyouse 7y ago
        I'd encourage you to read the link instead of whatever kind of dismissal this is. They have leaked correspondence between Stephen Miller and Breitbart coordinating the latter's coverage with an explicit nationalist bent. Breitbart relies on Camp of Saints and VDare for their sourcing on policy stories. Have we already forgotten their "Black Crime" news tag?
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
seibelj 7y ago
If she was on the board of a publication that promoted teacher's unions and left-wing ideology this would not be news. However she promoted charter schools and is anti-socialism, so therefore it's a big storm in the Twitter-verse. I for one love capitalism and would rather send my child to a charter rather than the high school near my apartment, where the Dean of Peace Relations was recently convicted for attempted murder of a student he recruited to deal drugs.[0] People without any means are forced to send their children to the monopoly school if they can't afford private and there are no charters. School choice is always preferable. [0] https://www.wbur.org/news/2018/05/31/shaun-harrison-guilty-boston-student-shooting https://www.wbur.org/news/2018/05/31/shaun-harrison-guilty-b...
SN76477 7y ago
Politics is full of bad actors, I do not think Warren is one of those people. You can disagree with her, sure, but she just wants to create fairness for all in my opinion. Facebook is the opposite of this, with their closed systems, back door dealings and often shady business practices it makes perfect sense that they are opposed to her.
- gadders 7y ago
  You don't think the whole debacle about claiming to be native american has hurt her credibility somewhat?
  - paulmd 7y ago
    Do I think her college admissions in 1975 affect her credibility as a senator in 2020? Not particularly, especially compared to her actual track record. (if we can find a way to forgive and forget Judge Boof's college "hijinks" I think we can find a way to forgive this.)
  - murph-almighty 7y ago
    I'll bite even though I'm a bit uninformed here: I think it's plausible to be told something about your heritage and not question it, especially if it's something spanning multiple generations where the paperwork validating the claim is either nonexistent or otherwise hard to reach. At varying points I've been told by relatives that I'm part Scottish, and told by others that I'm not, and I don't really have a straightforward way of validating this aside from engaging in some intensive research. I can reasonably extend the benefit of the doubt to Elizabeth Warren that she didn't know if she was actually some fraction Native American or not until the DNA test.
    - politil_throw93 7y ago
      > I can reasonably extend the benefit of the doubt to Elizabeth Warren that she didn't know if she was actually some fraction Native American or not until the DNA test. But she didn't claim to be 'some fraction Native American'. She said her race was 'Native American', just full-on 'Native American', on an official form. And she claimed to be Cherokee in a book. That's even more bizarre of a thing to claim. No matter what anyone told her, she must have known she wasn't part of the tribe? People say she's apologised, but she hasn't really said 'I'm sorry that I...' except that she's caused distress. What does she now admit she did? Lied? Stretched the truth? What does she see it as? What was going through her head. What would lead her to make such obviously ludicrous claims? Even if she did have one recent ancestor, which it turns out she probably didn't, it's still a nonsense claim that she is Native American and Cherokee. Does she still think she's Native American? Will she describe herself as the first Native American president? If she doesn't, what does she say is the difference between now and when she filled out that form? That's what I'm missing - her explanation.
CoolGuySteve 7y ago
A similar article seems to have gotten de-prioritized pretty quickly yesterday: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21504985 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21504985 What is the hnews policy for when "politics" collides with "tech"? These articles are only going to be more common as the election approaches.
- dang 7y ago
  Have a look at these links: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20%22political%20overlap%22&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19769679 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19769679 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17014869 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17014869 If you still have questions they don't answer, let me know what they are and I'll add to the set.
lwb 7y ago
I am shocked that this is news. A business person is critical of a politician. Who cares? Would this be news if, say, the head of Apple News was critical of Donald Trump?
rayiner 7y ago
I feel like this is grasping at straws. Facebook’s head of news co-founded a site in 2015 that promotes school choice, something supported by a majority of people and a super majority of people of color: https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/11/school-choice-strong-voter-support-for-expansion https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/11/school-choice-strong-.... The articles posted on this site were critical of Warren because of Warren’s opposition to school choice, but has also criticized the other Democratic candidates for taking the same position: https://www.the74million.org/article/stewart-the-democratic-presidential-candidate-have-something-for-everyone-except-classroom-students https://www.the74million.org/article/stewart-the-democratic-.... The attempt to make it seem like the criticism of Warren on this site has anything to do with Facebook is pretty weak. The site was started long before Warren said anything critical about Facebook. The site also has a good faith basis for being critical of Warren in this front. Warren’s opposition to school choice highlights a distressing fissure within the Democratic Party: https://www.gse.harvard.edu/news/19/08/ednext-poll-democrats-divided-over-school-choice https://www.gse.harvard.edu/news/19/08/ednext-poll-democrats... > African American Democrats support targeted school vouchers, universal vouchers, and charter schools at 70%, 60%, and 55%, respectively. Among Hispanic Democrats, support for the three policies is at 67%, 60%, and 47%. On the other hand, just 40% of non-Hispanic White Democrats support targeted vouchers, 46% support universal vouchers, and 33% support charter schools. The site is addressing a real debate within the Democratic Party, consistent with its founding principles, not using some contrived pretext to attack Warren for her comments about Facebook.
- alecb 7y ago
  Ah yes, "school choice", a nice rebranding effort for privatizing another industry so Betsy Devos and other aspiring oligarchs can destroy a public good for their profit.
  - macspoofing 7y ago
    Why not try a charitable interpretation of 'school choice'? People I know that support vouchers and charter schools do so because they genuinely care about quality education. Maybe they are misguided, but they certainly aren't doing it to create EVIL profit for the EVIL billionaire class. As a general principle, decentralization is good.
r00fus 7y ago
To those who downvote and think this kind of discussion is "off-topic" for HN: When and how do we hold our titans of industry accountable for their actions? Many here either work at FB or are reliant on their network for work related activities. All of this would be a whole lot less critical if Facebook did what Twitter did and bowed out of taking political ad money.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 7y ago
  > When and how do we hold our titans of industry accountable for their actions? We don't even hold ourselves accountable for our actions in this industry.

It's pretty clear over the past few months that Facebook has decided that it's going to support specific candidates and is abdicating it's role as a "communications medium" (Trump on the right, Buttigieg on the left). Their decision to accept paid lies (ads) by candidates (as opposed to Twitter) should tell us everything we need to know that FB views the targeted conspiracy-theory factually untrue bullshit - as a thing to be embraced (nay, not to avoid) - all for profit. Time will tell if they permit all such ads or only the ones that they prefer.

ceejayoz 7y ago
> Time will tell if they permit all such ads or only the ones that they prefer. This has already been answered. https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/29/tech/facebook-california-candidate-false-ads/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/29/tech/facebook-california-cand... > Adriel Hampton, a political activist, registered as a candidate for California's 2022 gubernatorial election on Monday so he could take advantage of Facebook's policy allowing politicians and political candidates to run false ads on the platform. > On Tuesday evening, a Facebook (FB) spokesperson told CNN Business, "This person has made clear he registered as a candidate to get around our policies, so his content, including ads, will continue to be eligible for third-party fact-checking." The rules will be enforced arbitrarily only when FB wants.
stevenwoo 7y ago
Breitbart being a trusted Facebook news source was kind of jaw dropping.
- JungleGymSam 7y ago
  What's your take on CNN and MSNBC? Mother Jones? The Daily Kos? HuffPo? etc.
  - Miner49er 7y ago
    Are any of those confirmed to be included? AFAIK none of those are.
    - pandemicsyn 7y ago
      Not sure any of those are specifically - but Buzzfeed.news, People, Business Insider etc are listed on the landing page as a sources.
  - mikeyouse 7y ago
    Breitbart is an explicitly white nationalist publication. There is no comparison with standard news. https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2019/11/12/stephen-millers-affinity-white-nationalism-revealed-leaked-emails https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2019/11/12/stephen-mille... Edit: Good lord people. SPLC has a cache of emails from Stephen Miller written to various people at Breitbart about reporting their stories with explicit white nationalist ideology. You don't have to like SPLC to believe the leaked emails any more than you had to like Wikileaks to believe the leaked DNC emails. Here's another source if you don't want to give them clicks: https://www.thedailybeast.com/stephen-miller-pushed-racist-stories-to-breitbart-leaked-emails-show https://www.thedailybeast.com/stephen-miller-pushed-racist-s...
    - refurb 7y ago
      SPLC is not an authority on what’s white supremacy and what’s not. They’ve been known to cast a wide net.
      - mikeyouse 7y ago
        I'd encourage you to read the link instead of whatever kind of dismissal this is. They have leaked correspondence between Stephen Miller and Breitbart coordinating the latter's coverage with an explicit nationalist bent. Breitbart relies on Camp of Saints and VDare for their sourcing on policy stories. Have we already forgotten their "Black Crime" news tag?
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]

seibelj 7y ago

If she was on the board of a publication that promoted teacher's unions and left-wing ideology this would not be news. However she promoted charter schools and is anti-socialism, so therefore it's a big storm in the Twitter-verse. I for one love capitalism and would rather send my child to a charter rather than the high school near my apartment, where the Dean of Peace Relations was recently convicted for attempted murder of a student he recruited to deal drugs.[0] People without any means are forced to send their children to the monopoly school if they can't afford private and there are no charters. School choice is always preferable. [0] https://www.wbur.org/news/2018/05/31/shaun-harrison-guilty-boston-student-shooting https://www.wbur.org/news/2018/05/31/shaun-harrison-guilty-b...

SN76477 7y ago

Politics is full of bad actors, I do not think Warren is one of those people. You can disagree with her, sure, but she just wants to create fairness for all in my opinion. Facebook is the opposite of this, with their closed systems, back door dealings and often shady business practices it makes perfect sense that they are opposed to her.

gadders 7y ago
You don't think the whole debacle about claiming to be native american has hurt her credibility somewhat?
- paulmd 7y ago
  Do I think her college admissions in 1975 affect her credibility as a senator in 2020? Not particularly, especially compared to her actual track record. (if we can find a way to forgive and forget Judge Boof's college "hijinks" I think we can find a way to forgive this.)
- murph-almighty 7y ago
  I'll bite even though I'm a bit uninformed here: I think it's plausible to be told something about your heritage and not question it, especially if it's something spanning multiple generations where the paperwork validating the claim is either nonexistent or otherwise hard to reach. At varying points I've been told by relatives that I'm part Scottish, and told by others that I'm not, and I don't really have a straightforward way of validating this aside from engaging in some intensive research. I can reasonably extend the benefit of the doubt to Elizabeth Warren that she didn't know if she was actually some fraction Native American or not until the DNA test.
  - politil_throw93 7y ago
    > I can reasonably extend the benefit of the doubt to Elizabeth Warren that she didn't know if she was actually some fraction Native American or not until the DNA test. But she didn't claim to be 'some fraction Native American'. She said her race was 'Native American', just full-on 'Native American', on an official form. And she claimed to be Cherokee in a book. That's even more bizarre of a thing to claim. No matter what anyone told her, she must have known she wasn't part of the tribe? People say she's apologised, but she hasn't really said 'I'm sorry that I...' except that she's caused distress. What does she now admit she did? Lied? Stretched the truth? What does she see it as? What was going through her head. What would lead her to make such obviously ludicrous claims? Even if she did have one recent ancestor, which it turns out she probably didn't, it's still a nonsense claim that she is Native American and Cherokee. Does she still think she's Native American? Will she describe herself as the first Native American president? If she doesn't, what does she say is the difference between now and when she filled out that form? That's what I'm missing - her explanation.

CoolGuySteve 7y ago

A similar article seems to have gotten de-prioritized pretty quickly yesterday: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21504985 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21504985 What is the hnews policy for when "politics" collides with "tech"? These articles are only going to be more common as the election approaches.

dang 7y ago
Have a look at these links: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20%22political%20overlap%22&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19769679 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19769679 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17014869 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17014869 If you still have questions they don't answer, let me know what they are and I'll add to the set.

lwb 7y ago

I am shocked that this is news. A business person is critical of a politician. Who cares? Would this be news if, say, the head of Apple News was critical of Donald Trump?

rayiner 7y ago

I feel like this is grasping at straws. Facebook’s head of news co-founded a site in 2015 that promotes school choice, something supported by a majority of people and a super majority of people of color: https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/11/school-choice-strong-voter-support-for-expansion https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/11/school-choice-strong-.... The articles posted on this site were critical of Warren because of Warren’s opposition to school choice, but has also criticized the other Democratic candidates for taking the same position: https://www.the74million.org/article/stewart-the-democratic-presidential-candidate-have-something-for-everyone-except-classroom-students https://www.the74million.org/article/stewart-the-democratic-.... The attempt to make it seem like the criticism of Warren on this site has anything to do with Facebook is pretty weak. The site was started long before Warren said anything critical about Facebook. The site also has a good faith basis for being critical of Warren in this front. Warren’s opposition to school choice highlights a distressing fissure within the Democratic Party: https://www.gse.harvard.edu/news/19/08/ednext-poll-democrats-divided-over-school-choice https://www.gse.harvard.edu/news/19/08/ednext-poll-democrats... > African American Democrats support targeted school vouchers, universal vouchers, and charter schools at 70%, 60%, and 55%, respectively. Among Hispanic Democrats, support for the three policies is at 67%, 60%, and 47%. On the other hand, just 40% of non-Hispanic White Democrats support targeted vouchers, 46% support universal vouchers, and 33% support charter schools. The site is addressing a real debate within the Democratic Party, consistent with its founding principles, not using some contrived pretext to attack Warren for her comments about Facebook.

alecb 7y ago
Ah yes, "school choice", a nice rebranding effort for privatizing another industry so Betsy Devos and other aspiring oligarchs can destroy a public good for their profit.
- macspoofing 7y ago
  Why not try a charitable interpretation of 'school choice'? People I know that support vouchers and charter schools do so because they genuinely care about quality education. Maybe they are misguided, but they certainly aren't doing it to create EVIL profit for the EVIL billionaire class. As a general principle, decentralization is good.

r00fus 7y ago

To those who downvote and think this kind of discussion is "off-topic" for HN: When and how do we hold our titans of industry accountable for their actions? Many here either work at FB or are reliant on their network for work related activities. All of this would be a whole lot less critical if Facebook did what Twitter did and bowed out of taking political ad money.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 7y ago
> When and how do we hold our titans of industry accountable for their actions? We don't even hold ourselves accountable for our actions in this industry.