3 ms·

> Mr. Thiel has argued that Facebook should stick to its controversial decision... to continue accepting [political ads with no fact checking] Okay, so just to

> Mr. Thiel has argued that Facebook should stick to its controversial decision... to continue accepting [political ads with no fact checking] Okay, so just to recap: 1. Thiel is the investor who made billions off of Facebook before becoming a high-profile Trump supporter. 2. Trump is the guy who became president thanks in no small part to misinformation campaigns at scale made possible by Facebook's ad platform. 3. Thiel is now one of the strongest voices arguing that Facebook should remain in the political misinformation-for-profit business. I couldn't read the entire article due to paywall, but forgive me for having doubts that Thiel's convictions are based on a desire to do what's right for democracy.

nyolfen 7y ago
ignoring the totally insubstantiable claim that facebook ads got trump elected, the alternative is making facebook the gatekeeper of political truth. this scares me much more than six figure ad spends in a presidential election.
- mindgam3 7y ago
  > the totally insubstantiable claim that facebook ads got trump elected https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/03/22/all-the-ways-trumps-campaign-was-aided-by-facebook-ranked-by-importance/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/03/22/a... > the alternative is making facebook the gatekeeper of political truth This argument is so played out. If it cared enough, or was forced to by regulation, Facebook could deploy enough fact checkers to greatly reduce the problem.
  - s_y_n_t_a_x 7y ago
    > forced to by regulation So now you want the government to tell Facebook what is truthful? Government approved media is propaganda. Do you not see how flawed this is!? The argument is not played out. I do NOT want Facebook telling me what is the truth. Period. If you want to limit their targeting tools for political ads, that's an okay route for me.
  - nyolfen 7y ago
    would you trust fox news' fact checkers? do you think fox news viewers would trust yours? any fact checking apparatus would immediately become politically contested and unworkable in the best case scenario; in the worst case, we have a privatized ministry of truth that acts unilaterally. why would you trust facebook with anything approaching control of political discourse after the experience of the last election? are you naive to think that the 'fact checkers' will always be on your side? if you are, do you think your opponents will just sit there and let them control discourse?

nyolfen 7y ago

ignoring the totally insubstantiable claim that facebook ads got trump elected, the alternative is making facebook the gatekeeper of political truth. this scares me much more than six figure ad spends in a presidential election.

mindgam3 7y ago
> the totally insubstantiable claim that facebook ads got trump elected https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/03/22/all-the-ways-trumps-campaign-was-aided-by-facebook-ranked-by-importance/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/03/22/a... > the alternative is making facebook the gatekeeper of political truth This argument is so played out. If it cared enough, or was forced to by regulation, Facebook could deploy enough fact checkers to greatly reduce the problem.
- s_y_n_t_a_x 7y ago
  > forced to by regulation So now you want the government to tell Facebook what is truthful? Government approved media is propaganda. Do you not see how flawed this is!? The argument is not played out. I do NOT want Facebook telling me what is the truth. Period. If you want to limit their targeting tools for political ads, that's an okay route for me.
- nyolfen 7y ago
  would you trust fox news' fact checkers? do you think fox news viewers would trust yours? any fact checking apparatus would immediately become politically contested and unworkable in the best case scenario; in the worst case, we have a privatized ministry of truth that acts unilaterally. why would you trust facebook with anything approaching control of political discourse after the experience of the last election? are you naive to think that the 'fact checkers' will always be on your side? if you are, do you think your opponents will just sit there and let them control discourse?