6 ms·

Because this is not private data, this is public discourse. How can we have conversations with people and argue about issues, if we and them have been different

Because this is not private data, this is public discourse. How can we have conversations with people and argue about issues, if we and them have been different information and basically think that the same words have different meanings?

nickff 6y ago
What other people are seeing is public discourse? I'm not sure I follow. Is their search history also public discourse?
- Barrin92 6y ago
  >What other people are seeing is public discourse advertisement is part of public discourse, in particular political advertisement.
  - bryan_w 6y ago
    All FB political ads are listed in Facebook's Ad Library
    - Barrin92 6y ago
      also directly from the article >But that library excludes information about the targeting that determines who sees the ads. >The researchers behind the NYU Ad Observatory said they wanted to provide journalists, researchers, policy makers, and others with the ability to search political ads by state and contest to see what messages are targeted to specific audiences and how those ads are funded. The point of the research is to figure out what ads Facebook shows to which users, which is of course particularly important for people who try to do research on how ads on Facebook intersect with politics.
- gostsamo 6y ago
  Political ads, political commentaries, memes. I have someone on my contact list in fb who honestly thinks that QAnon exposes pedophiles. I can't wrap my head around how the heck they've reached that conclusion.
  - m0zg 6y ago
    It's actually kind of weird. It seems like the left is _obsessed_ with QAnon for some reason. I'm firmly on the right, and I hardly hear anything about it at all. Take a look at right-wing news sources and community websites - nobody treats it seriously, and it's hardly mentioned at all, other than in the context of the left-wing having a raging hard-on for banning it. If you asked me about any of their "conspiracies" I wouldn't know how to respond.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - gostsamo 6y ago
      The person quoted that banning QAnon groups is how mainstream censorship prevents honest people from exposing pedophiles. Take it or not.
    - ethbr0 6y ago
      It sells papers (or digital equivalents). On Fox News, the left is nothing but a violent BLM mob being cheered on by supportive governors. Supported by Soros. On MSNBC, the right is nothing but a violent fascist mob being cheered on by a supportive president. Supported by the Koch brothers. Thankfully, we live in a country where the average person is not crazy. Unfortunately, you'd never know that from watching what passes for news these days.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
    - nemothekid 6y ago
      Yes, the right has their own boogeymen, like Antifa and BLM. However I'm willing to bet you don't see anything about Q in right wing news sources is there is literally nothing to write about them except "these guys think Trump is fighting a deep underground pedo cabal" and I'm sure they don't want to antagonize their readers.
- obmelvin 6y ago
  > Is their search history also public discourse? Oh, come on. You are bringing that into this discussion. The topic is not people's private search or browsing history. Political advertisements are very clearly a public issue.
  - polyomino 6y ago
    Ad targeting is largely informed by browsing history.
    - Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago
      Americans may not have a right to know whose paying for the propaganda we see, but, as far as I know, we do have a right to know what political propaganda is being spread and what groups.
tjpnz 6y ago
The technical term for that is "theory of mind". Without it you've basically lost the ability to have and participate in civil society.
- toxik 6y ago
  Interesting observation. Would make for a great sci-fi novel premise.
  - Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago
    Wouldn't the Truman show be an example here? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Truman_Show https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Truman_Show Non mobile https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Truman_Show https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Truman_Show
    - toxik 6y ago
      Tangentially at best, The Truman Show is great but there is complete theory of mind between all characters; there is just a big conspiracy. A real breakdown of theory of mind would mean that there is a breakdown in common understanding. Like with an animal, you don't have complete theory of mind with an animal, and it certainly does not with you -- there is an inability to account for the reasoning of a dog.
  - Kim_Bruning 6y ago
    I think it is arguable that one could plausibly make a Documentary already! The way current social media and search engines optimize for engagement and tailor information to each user, people have really different views on the universe right now as is; and this has already had real-world consequences. (eg. corona-response, motivations for or against Brexit, etc. )

nickff 6y ago

What other people are seeing is public discourse? I'm not sure I follow. Is their search history also public discourse?

Barrin92 6y ago
>What other people are seeing is public discourse advertisement is part of public discourse, in particular political advertisement.
- bryan_w 6y ago
  All FB political ads are listed in Facebook's Ad Library
  - Barrin92 6y ago
    also directly from the article >But that library excludes information about the targeting that determines who sees the ads. >The researchers behind the NYU Ad Observatory said they wanted to provide journalists, researchers, policy makers, and others with the ability to search political ads by state and contest to see what messages are targeted to specific audiences and how those ads are funded. The point of the research is to figure out what ads Facebook shows to which users, which is of course particularly important for people who try to do research on how ads on Facebook intersect with politics.
gostsamo 6y ago
Political ads, political commentaries, memes. I have someone on my contact list in fb who honestly thinks that QAnon exposes pedophiles. I can't wrap my head around how the heck they've reached that conclusion.
- m0zg 6y ago
  It's actually kind of weird. It seems like the left is _obsessed_ with QAnon for some reason. I'm firmly on the right, and I hardly hear anything about it at all. Take a look at right-wing news sources and community websites - nobody treats it seriously, and it's hardly mentioned at all, other than in the context of the left-wing having a raging hard-on for banning it. If you asked me about any of their "conspiracies" I wouldn't know how to respond.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - gostsamo 6y ago
    The person quoted that banning QAnon groups is how mainstream censorship prevents honest people from exposing pedophiles. Take it or not.
  - ethbr0 6y ago
    It sells papers (or digital equivalents). On Fox News, the left is nothing but a violent BLM mob being cheered on by supportive governors. Supported by Soros. On MSNBC, the right is nothing but a violent fascist mob being cheered on by a supportive president. Supported by the Koch brothers. Thankfully, we live in a country where the average person is not crazy. Unfortunately, you'd never know that from watching what passes for news these days.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  - nemothekid 6y ago
    Yes, the right has their own boogeymen, like Antifa and BLM. However I'm willing to bet you don't see anything about Q in right wing news sources is there is literally nothing to write about them except "these guys think Trump is fighting a deep underground pedo cabal" and I'm sure they don't want to antagonize their readers.
obmelvin 6y ago
> Is their search history also public discourse? Oh, come on. You are bringing that into this discussion. The topic is not people's private search or browsing history. Political advertisements are very clearly a public issue.
- polyomino 6y ago
  Ad targeting is largely informed by browsing history.
  - Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago
    Americans may not have a right to know whose paying for the propaganda we see, but, as far as I know, we do have a right to know what political propaganda is being spread and what groups.

tjpnz 6y ago

The technical term for that is "theory of mind". Without it you've basically lost the ability to have and participate in civil society.

toxik 6y ago
Interesting observation. Would make for a great sci-fi novel premise.
- Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago
  Wouldn't the Truman show be an example here? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Truman_Show https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Truman_Show Non mobile https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Truman_Show https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Truman_Show
  - toxik 6y ago
    Tangentially at best, The Truman Show is great but there is complete theory of mind between all characters; there is just a big conspiracy. A real breakdown of theory of mind would mean that there is a breakdown in common understanding. Like with an animal, you don't have complete theory of mind with an animal, and it certainly does not with you -- there is an inability to account for the reasoning of a dog.
- Kim_Bruning 6y ago
  I think it is arguable that one could plausibly make a Documentary already! The way current social media and search engines optimize for engagement and tailor information to each user, people have really different views on the universe right now as is; and this has already had real-world consequences. (eg. corona-response, motivations for or against Brexit, etc. )