4 ms·

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 "communicat

by 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?
        DuskStar 7y ago
        > with an explicit nationalist bent. If that's all, it's really interesting that it became white nationalist in SPLC's reporting...
        mikeyouse 7y ago
        They literally had a section on their 'news' website called "Black Crime" - the terms are synonymous. It's astonishing to me that the crowd would rather parse SPLC's phrasing or history rather than the documentary evidence that there are white nationalists making policy at the highest levels of our government and coordinating with one of Facebook's 'approved news sources'.
  - stevenwoo 7y ago
    Not familiar with HuffPo but based on your examples of either middle of the road to corporate Democratic supporters I think the whole narrative of there being a bias against conservative news is a false victimization claim. There should be a bias against untruths, even wikipedia banned Breitbart and the Daily Mail as references.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]

by r00fus 7y ago

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?
      - DuskStar 7y ago
        > with an explicit nationalist bent. If that's all, it's really interesting that it became white nationalist in SPLC's reporting...
        mikeyouse 7y ago
        They literally had a section on their 'news' website called "Black Crime" - the terms are synonymous. It's astonishing to me that the crowd would rather parse SPLC's phrasing or history rather than the documentary evidence that there are white nationalists making policy at the highest levels of our government and coordinating with one of Facebook's 'approved news sources'.
- stevenwoo 7y ago
  Not familiar with HuffPo but based on your examples of either middle of the road to corporate Democratic supporters I think the whole narrative of there being a bias against conservative news is a false victimization claim. There should be a bias against untruths, even wikipedia banned Breitbart and the Daily Mail as references.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]