3 ms·
Most of the big ad companies/social media platforms see their curation of the content flow as a strategic asset because the curation is what lets them drive eye
by SiempreViernes 6y ago
Most of the big ad companies/social media platforms see their curation of the content flow as a strategic asset because the curation is what lets them drive eyeballs to whatever pays.
So curation independent of the wishes of the user is a central feature, making this sound like platforms would become really responsible for moderating what they publish. Historically this has been seen as completely cray-cray by the platform owners and they've fought it off successfully so far.
- DarkWiiPlayer 6y agoSo what's wrong with twitter being responsible for the tweets that it drives eyeballs to? If you pay twitter to promote your content, then yes, twitter should be responsible for the legality of this content. This doesn't mean twitter should be responsible for every dumb thing some edgy teenager thinks is socially acceptable to shout out into the world (So long as it doesn't get promoted or endorsed by the platform).
- luckylion 6y ago> If you pay twitter to promote your content, then yes, twitter should be responsible for the legality of this content. Imho that's exactly what Twitter does want to avoid under all circumstances because it would basically make ad-automation more risky. Google dealing with regulation around advertising for medical products chose a blanket ban for any and all ads on a large range of keywords for some areas, and will only manually allow e.g. the manufacturer of some medication to buy ads. Automatically judging the legality of ads / tweets is too risky, and doing it manually is too costly (and still somewhat risky).