3 ms·
I’m not a fan of muckraking and clickbait in modern journalism, but Facebook’s opaque policies and secrets around news seem more ridiculous the more they get br
by siruncledrew 5y ago
I’m not a fan of muckraking and clickbait in modern journalism, but Facebook’s opaque policies and secrets around news seem more ridiculous the more they get brought up.
Naively (not in practice but in theory), I would think the spirit of news and communication would be letting the readers decide, rather than let an entity (government or corporation) decide for the public.
Facebook is the hand that feeds, and they hold the upper hand in having the ability to leverage news/consumers/publishers in whatever ways they can.
Considering even politicians could be getting their news from Facebook, imagine the potential for subtle manipulation of what certain groups see or don’t see. Show everything positive about Facebook and hide all the negatives. Prevent content from being posted or shared that could hurt Facebook’s business. Shift the blame and make up a technical statement to sell to regulators like “even we, at Facebook, don’t have any control over our policies and there’s a whole magical system of electrons and servers moving your news around behind the curtain of Oz and it’s so complicated it would be impossible to explain.”
- zibzab 5y ago> I would think the spirit of news and communication would be letting the readers decide... While it sounds very good in theory, we both know the readers are not qualified enough to distinguish between fact and nonsense. If enough big newspapers tell people 5G causes covid, eventually a majority will believe it is so. You need aan independent entity that removes incorrect information, but it must be just and transparent.