4 ms·

It generally doesn't make sense for companies to get involved with Twittersphere activism. It doesn't solve the purported problem and it's impossible to please

by cm2012 6y ago

It generally doesn't make sense for companies to get involved with Twittersphere activism. It doesn't solve the purported problem and it's impossible to please the crowd, as you can see in the rest of the comments on this thread. Here's what I wrote about the boycott four months ago on HN: "I'm also a FB advertiser. Here my thoughts on it: 1) Facebook's reach is unique. If you want to share a message that's important to you with groups of people you care about reaching in the world, there's no better way to reach them at scale. 2) Facebook has had a number of negative sounding news cycles in the past few years (Cambridge Analytica, etc.), and data shows that the average American hasn't changed their behavior based on them. 70% of all Americans and Canadians use Facebook or Instagram at least once a month, and 55% of all Americans and Canadians use it at least once per day. Facebook's monthly and daily user counts have only grown, including this last quarter. 3) Very few advertisers ended up cutting spend during the boycott. Many who did so wanted to cut ad spend in a COVID environment anyway. For instance, Unilever and Coca-Cola also paused Twitter ads, which has nothing to do with the boycott. 4) I myself believe that, at least in comparison to other companies like Google, Facebook does try to police hate speech, and it's a hard job."

PragmaticPulp 6y ago
> It generally doesn't make sense for companies to get involved with Twittersphere activism One of the unspoken trends in pop-culture activism is a seething hatred of large corporations. The current trend is that the only acceptable criticisms are those that are "punching up", meaning they're directed at someone or something of higher perceived social status. Taken to the extremes, the only safe targets for "punching up" are the largest corporations and billionaires. This mentality is especially prevalent among the younger students I've mentored. They seem highly confident that corporations are somehow taking something from them, but they can't exactly explain it. For example, virtually everyone is convinced that Facebook is selling their data, yet when pressed they can't explain what "their data" is, or who Facebook might be selling it to (Facebook doesn't sell data, the idea that Facebook is selling people's data is a myth). It's amazing to hear so many people insist that Instagram is listening to their conversations to sell ads (they're not), yet they can't point to any sort of background activity, battery drain, network activity, or reverse engineering reports. The supposed evil of large corporations is treated like magic. Likewise, many of my mentees will insist that large corporations "don't pay any taxes". Yet when I explain that corporate income tax is only one of many taxes that companies pay and that the corporations they're thinking of are actually paying corporate income taxes on their earnings, they assume I'm somehow misinformed. In the hyper-connected social media of 2020, it seems the safest and most persistent themes are "corporations are bad". This is easily bolstered by cherry-picking a small number of anecdotes of bad things that were done by corporations, yet it's missing the point that corporations do a lot of things, the vast majority of which are not "bad". It's the equivalent of saying "humans are bad" after reading about a few serial killers. The idea is especially sticky among young people because they haven't yet worked inside of corporations long enough to realize that corporations are just groups of people. They speak of corporations as some sort of sentient alien entity, or as an extension of Zuckerberg and Bezos.
- kodah 6y ago
  They aren't totally wrong about the state of things, just wrong about why. > virtually everyone is convinced that Facebook is selling their data, yet when pressed they can't explain what "their data" is, or who Facebook might be selling it to (Facebook doesn't sell data, the idea that Facebook is selling people's data is a myth) 1. You're playing word games. Yes, Facebook doesn't sell data, they provide access to and use of it with streamlined products and services. The extent to which can be abused and/or used against you. 2. Things like privacy laws would delineate what data someone owns and what they don't. I think this is a great topic for debate, but not dismissal in either direction. > It's amazing to hear so many people insist that Instagram is listening to their conversations to sell ads Instagram (and other social media) doesn't need to listen to you when graph theory and it's surrounding algorithms do the correlation way cheaper than real time audio processing ever could. The reality is almost worse than the rumor. > many of my mentees will insist that large corporations "don't pay any taxes" Somewhat. Not all corporations dodge taxes or have obtained favorable tax deals, but the ones that do often do so grossly. Even the way various companies have shifted money around to different nations to avoid paying taxes is problematic. The rest I agree with. The whole concept of punching anywhere is pretty gross, where else in society do we authorize "punching" because you don't like someone or somethings behavior? Nowhere. Personally speaking, I think someone or something is out there establishing these narratives and making them so cloudy to talk about that they're unfalsifiable. It kind of reminds me of the church. Ironically, the idea of "punching up" comes out of a moral community -- and guess what a religion also is?
- travisoneill1 6y ago
  A lot of people on HN believe this too.
- tehjoker 6y ago
  All you have to do is point to the fact that the corporations are making a few people rich and not spreading the wealth. That's enough for me. Democracy and inequality are incompatible ideas.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
ksec 6y ago
Unfortunately the above narrative is not a popular view for mainstream media or on HN. >Facebook does try to police hate speech, and it's a hard job." I actually think they did a pretty decent job before, but now they have harden things up and it is crossing the threshold for some people. The world of political correctness is getting a little insane.
- jonas21 6y ago
  I think this gets at the root of the problem. If Facebook tries to get to the optimal level of moderation, then for every person who thinks they're doing too little moderation, there will be someone else who thinks they're doing too much. Unfortunately for Facebook, that's also the point where pretty much everyone hates them.
  - ksec 6y ago
    I think it is still primarily an US issue. Facebook in other countries ( and including US ) are working really well for small business. Hence they do have a point with their ads. The problem is politics getting into the centre of everything. After seeing and experiencing both side of the spectrum. I will still choose little to no moderation without a second thought. And Mark Zuckerberg isn't a genius in marketing or PR like Steve Jobs, his message isn't working out the way he intended.

by cm2012 6y ago

PragmaticPulp 6y ago

> It generally doesn't make sense for companies to get involved with Twittersphere activism One of the unspoken trends in pop-culture activism is a seething hatred of large corporations. The current trend is that the only acceptable criticisms are those that are "punching up", meaning they're directed at someone or something of higher perceived social status. Taken to the extremes, the only safe targets for "punching up" are the largest corporations and billionaires. This mentality is especially prevalent among the younger students I've mentored. They seem highly confident that corporations are somehow taking something from them, but they can't exactly explain it. For example, virtually everyone is convinced that Facebook is selling their data, yet when pressed they can't explain what "their data" is, or who Facebook might be selling it to (Facebook doesn't sell data, the idea that Facebook is selling people's data is a myth). It's amazing to hear so many people insist that Instagram is listening to their conversations to sell ads (they're not), yet they can't point to any sort of background activity, battery drain, network activity, or reverse engineering reports. The supposed evil of large corporations is treated like magic. Likewise, many of my mentees will insist that large corporations "don't pay any taxes". Yet when I explain that corporate income tax is only one of many taxes that companies pay and that the corporations they're thinking of are actually paying corporate income taxes on their earnings, they assume I'm somehow misinformed. In the hyper-connected social media of 2020, it seems the safest and most persistent themes are "corporations are bad". This is easily bolstered by cherry-picking a small number of anecdotes of bad things that were done by corporations, yet it's missing the point that corporations do a lot of things, the vast majority of which are not "bad". It's the equivalent of saying "humans are bad" after reading about a few serial killers. The idea is especially sticky among young people because they haven't yet worked inside of corporations long enough to realize that corporations are just groups of people. They speak of corporations as some sort of sentient alien entity, or as an extension of Zuckerberg and Bezos.

kodah 6y ago
They aren't totally wrong about the state of things, just wrong about why. > virtually everyone is convinced that Facebook is selling their data, yet when pressed they can't explain what "their data" is, or who Facebook might be selling it to (Facebook doesn't sell data, the idea that Facebook is selling people's data is a myth) 1. You're playing word games. Yes, Facebook doesn't sell data, they provide access to and use of it with streamlined products and services. The extent to which can be abused and/or used against you. 2. Things like privacy laws would delineate what data someone owns and what they don't. I think this is a great topic for debate, but not dismissal in either direction. > It's amazing to hear so many people insist that Instagram is listening to their conversations to sell ads Instagram (and other social media) doesn't need to listen to you when graph theory and it's surrounding algorithms do the correlation way cheaper than real time audio processing ever could. The reality is almost worse than the rumor. > many of my mentees will insist that large corporations "don't pay any taxes" Somewhat. Not all corporations dodge taxes or have obtained favorable tax deals, but the ones that do often do so grossly. Even the way various companies have shifted money around to different nations to avoid paying taxes is problematic. The rest I agree with. The whole concept of punching anywhere is pretty gross, where else in society do we authorize "punching" because you don't like someone or somethings behavior? Nowhere. Personally speaking, I think someone or something is out there establishing these narratives and making them so cloudy to talk about that they're unfalsifiable. It kind of reminds me of the church. Ironically, the idea of "punching up" comes out of a moral community -- and guess what a religion also is?
travisoneill1 6y ago
A lot of people on HN believe this too.
tehjoker 6y ago
All you have to do is point to the fact that the corporations are making a few people rich and not spreading the wealth. That's enough for me. Democracy and inequality are incompatible ideas.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

ksec 6y ago

Unfortunately the above narrative is not a popular view for mainstream media or on HN. >Facebook does try to police hate speech, and it's a hard job." I actually think they did a pretty decent job before, but now they have harden things up and it is crossing the threshold for some people. The world of political correctness is getting a little insane.

jonas21 6y ago
I think this gets at the root of the problem. If Facebook tries to get to the optimal level of moderation, then for every person who thinks they're doing too little moderation, there will be someone else who thinks they're doing too much. Unfortunately for Facebook, that's also the point where pretty much everyone hates them.
- ksec 6y ago
  I think it is still primarily an US issue. Facebook in other countries ( and including US ) are working really well for small business. Hence they do have a point with their ads. The problem is politics getting into the centre of everything. After seeing and experiencing both side of the spectrum. I will still choose little to no moderation without a second thought. And Mark Zuckerberg isn't a genius in marketing or PR like Steve Jobs, his message isn't working out the way he intended.