4 ms·

It does matter, look at who is in power after democratic elections where FB aided and abetted foreign nations to lie and deceive voters.

stuaxo 7y ago
Parties within countries were able to manipulate elections, see the UK, with the vast avalaunch of deceptive ads where Cambridge Analytica were involved - circumventing limits on election spending.
ch4s3 7y ago
As much as I dislike FB I think this gives their ad platform far too much credit. How do you go about connecting ads viewed to votes, or even poling data? Of those views how many users engaged with the content?
- take_a_breath 7y ago
  Some people are obviously making a connection between the two or else there wouldn't be political spending on Facebook.
  - ch4s3 7y ago
    Campaigns and PACs spend money on all kinds of useless things. The burden of proof is on the people claiming that Facebook ads are uniquely malevolent and effective. This is also not to mention that the money spent on Facebook pales in comparison to other channels. From my perspective, it has all of the hallmarks of a moral panic, right down to the calls to "think of the children."
    - take_a_breath 7y ago
      ==Campaigns and PACs spend money on all kinds of useless things.== Do you have a citation for this? It seems like a failure in the free market if organizations spend $55 billion [1] on Facebook advertisements with no benefit. ==From my perspective, it has all of the hallmarks of a moral panic, right down to the calls to "think of the children."== What data is that perspective based on or is it just your gut feeling (aka bias)? [1] https://martechtoday.com/despite-ongoing-criticism-facebook-generates-16-6-billion-in-ad-revenue-during-q4-up-30-yoy-230261 https://martechtoday.com/despite-ongoing-criticism-facebook-...
      - ch4s3 7y ago
        Do you need a citation to know that lots of PACs engage in polling using worthless methodology? Surely you've seen expensive TV spots that have no clear messaging and make the candidate they support look awful. A whole lot of campaign spending seems like grifting, but maybe I'm wrong. Look, I'm not say that FB ads are totally useless in general, just that there's some burden of proof when you claim they swayed an election. > What data is that perspective based on or is it just your gut feeling (aka bias)? People have literally used the phrase "think of the children," or some variation.
      - ekianjo 7y ago
        First, you dont know if your investment is good until the election actually happens since polls are massively unreliable, so the opportunity to adjust spending is limited. Second, campaigns are not driven like companies.
  - ekianjo 7y ago
    Political spending happens anyway regardless whether or not Facebook exists. now it is just one more channel to use to reach people, among dozens of others.
_red 7y ago
Yes. those crafty russians who forced the american elite hollow-out the middle class, undermined Bernies primary, and installed unelectable professional grifters on the Dem ticket. You should also consider that you are not viewing reality correctly.
- inerte 7y ago
  Why not both? Or rather, all of that? The fact salaries for the bottom half of America are flat for 40 years doesn’t change the facts on Russia and FB.
  - seppin 7y ago
    This type of nuance isn't what social media is built for so perhaps to receive no attention for it.
  - ekianjo 7y ago
    It is usually not the same people who stay at the bottom for 40 years so this kind of comment is really only useful to push political agendas rather than any kind of reality check.
AsyncAwait 7y ago
Alternative view, the U.S may have got a small taste of what it regularly does to others and continues doing so, having apparently no sense of hypocrysy whatsoever.

stuaxo 7y ago

Parties within countries were able to manipulate elections, see the UK, with the vast avalaunch of deceptive ads where Cambridge Analytica were involved - circumventing limits on election spending.

ch4s3 7y ago

As much as I dislike FB I think this gives their ad platform far too much credit. How do you go about connecting ads viewed to votes, or even poling data? Of those views how many users engaged with the content?

take_a_breath 7y ago
Some people are obviously making a connection between the two or else there wouldn't be political spending on Facebook.
- ch4s3 7y ago
  Campaigns and PACs spend money on all kinds of useless things. The burden of proof is on the people claiming that Facebook ads are uniquely malevolent and effective. This is also not to mention that the money spent on Facebook pales in comparison to other channels. From my perspective, it has all of the hallmarks of a moral panic, right down to the calls to "think of the children."
  - take_a_breath 7y ago
    ==Campaigns and PACs spend money on all kinds of useless things.== Do you have a citation for this? It seems like a failure in the free market if organizations spend $55 billion [1] on Facebook advertisements with no benefit. ==From my perspective, it has all of the hallmarks of a moral panic, right down to the calls to "think of the children."== What data is that perspective based on or is it just your gut feeling (aka bias)? [1] https://martechtoday.com/despite-ongoing-criticism-facebook-generates-16-6-billion-in-ad-revenue-during-q4-up-30-yoy-230261 https://martechtoday.com/despite-ongoing-criticism-facebook-...
    - ch4s3 7y ago
      Do you need a citation to know that lots of PACs engage in polling using worthless methodology? Surely you've seen expensive TV spots that have no clear messaging and make the candidate they support look awful. A whole lot of campaign spending seems like grifting, but maybe I'm wrong. Look, I'm not say that FB ads are totally useless in general, just that there's some burden of proof when you claim they swayed an election. > What data is that perspective based on or is it just your gut feeling (aka bias)? People have literally used the phrase "think of the children," or some variation.
    - ekianjo 7y ago
      First, you dont know if your investment is good until the election actually happens since polls are massively unreliable, so the opportunity to adjust spending is limited. Second, campaigns are not driven like companies.
- ekianjo 7y ago
  Political spending happens anyway regardless whether or not Facebook exists. now it is just one more channel to use to reach people, among dozens of others.

_red 7y ago

Yes. those crafty russians who forced the american elite hollow-out the middle class, undermined Bernies primary, and installed unelectable professional grifters on the Dem ticket. You should also consider that you are not viewing reality correctly.

inerte 7y ago
Why not both? Or rather, all of that? The fact salaries for the bottom half of America are flat for 40 years doesn’t change the facts on Russia and FB.
- seppin 7y ago
  This type of nuance isn't what social media is built for so perhaps to receive no attention for it.
- ekianjo 7y ago
  It is usually not the same people who stay at the bottom for 40 years so this kind of comment is really only useful to push political agendas rather than any kind of reality check.

AsyncAwait 7y ago

Alternative view, the U.S may have got a small taste of what it regularly does to others and continues doing so, having apparently no sense of hypocrysy whatsoever.