3 ms·
That doesn't tell us it was targeted - perhaps that's not the explicit claim the article makes, but it is certainly implied. If Facebook can't control the impre
by Fellshard 6y ago
That doesn't tell us it was targeted - perhaps that's not the explicit claim the article makes, but it is certainly implied. If Facebook can't control the impressions for each ad partner, it's likely more than just Mother Jones were affected. If their algorithms are bad enough, driving people off the platform, that might also contribute to declines. (This is one major reason I no longer use FB: it can no longer serve any of the baseline purposes it was intended for, because of how poorly its feed algorithms work.)
- _exnk 6y agoThe Verge is a Vox owned website. They do some good reporting but they’re not the most impartial.
- wwright 6y agoWhat does an impartial website look like? How does one have a website that sees no particular group as more correct than any other?
- iaw 6y agoIn order to determine impartiality you have to use your brain to think through what the themes of every article coming from the paper are. An impartial source of news will be critical of both sides, a biased source of news is only critical of one. Bias doesn't necessarily make the news wrong but it does mean the news is framed in a way to benefit one particular group or another.
- Can_Not 6y agoThere are plenty of articles that criticize "both sides" on topics where only one side has done wrong.
- _exnk 6y agoCheck out the hill. They do a decent job of representing many different viewpoints without being alarmist. Opinion pieces are pretty clearly differentiated from reporting pieces.
- gen3 6y agoapnews.com or reuters.com seem to be pretty impartial, since they are intended to be wire services.