4 ms·
I don't see how it's a requirement to allow politicians to lie. For instance, both Twitter and Google now prohibit political advertisement entirely. Facebook co
by faitswulff 7y ago
I don't see how it's a requirement to allow politicians to lie. For instance, both Twitter and Google now prohibit political advertisement entirely. Facebook could follow suit. They'd just make less money.
- Fellshard 7y agoImplicit in that statement is that you are allowing Facebook to lie. You cannot stop people from lying; what you can do is silence the ability to counter lies spread through other mediums.
- bananabreakfast 7y agoPolitical ad spend is a tiny amount of facebook's revenue. It has nothing to do with money and everything to do with Zuck's politics
- monocasa 7y agoIt's not about overt advertisements, but standard viral communications that the platforms live and die on.
- reaperducer 7y agoPolitical ad spend is a tiny amount of facebook's revenue Then there's no reason not to discontinue political ads.
- monocasa 7y agoBecause politicians can find ways to shut down companies. I've heard rumors that Microsoft's antitrust woes in the 90s were as much a reflection of their unwillingness to play ball with some political goals as much as any legitimate antitrust concerns. And Twitter special cases politicians in their system last time I checked. That's how Trump doesn't get his account banned for stuff that would get you and I banned.