7 ms·
Meta to bar Russian state media from running ads, monetizing on platform
- asah 5y agoTranslation: meta to take unlimited advertising revenue from Russian state sponsored proxies.
- spacemanmatt 5y agoThey will keep selling pro-fascist ads to anyone who doesn't overtly present as part of the Russian government. This is another total dodge from the blue site.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- politician 5y agoIs Meta coordinating with the Biden administration? A company its size should not be interfering in foreign policy without direction from the White House.
- _Algernon_ 5y agoThis is not interfering in foreign policy. It's a private company (pretending to) not sell their services to someone.
- Overtonwindow 5y agoI wish Facebook had banned Russian state interference and advertisements before the invasion..
- blablabla123 5y agoYeah, IMHO they should just get rid of all political content altogether
- ganzuul 5y agoThat is what is happening in the non-free world.
- blablabla123 5y agoNo it's not. In the non-free world text itself is censored. Nobody prevents you from sending News article links via Whatsapp, who cares. But people constructing SEO-optimized fakenews links is really bad and IMHO there is no way to prevent that without putting in the work that actual journalists and publishers do. People can still visit the news sites (in the "free world") directly. In fact maybe this would stop the bankruptcy of the news outlets that's been going on since more than a decade
- IYasha 5y agoEnjoy your China. Almost no politics, almost no internets.
- blablabla123 5y agoWhat I'm saying is, FB is amazingly bad at handling news content. Everything they do in this directions backfires badly, becoming a cesspool of misinformation leading to riots etc. I mean if people link content anyway, why don't people just visit it directly? I mean with the inception of Google News, people thought News has little value because it is so repetitive and many news outlets went bankrupt leading to less and less reflected news to what we have now. I think if people would go for (Online) Newspaper subscriptions instead of just clicking on the most flashy FB post, this would surely make the world a better place and would be quite contrary to China where Newspapers are censored
- user3939382 5y agoI don’t want social media platforms picking political winners and losers, whether their choice aligns with my personal politics or not.
- nine_zeros 5y agoBut they already do by letting more money win with more ads.
- 9dev 5y agoThis is no ordinary political disagreement, however. Russia is committing a crime, plain and simply. I doubt you would want murderers advertise for their cause on Facebook.
- politician 5y agoFacebook is engaging in vigilantism. Let them coordinate with the White House. Banks don’t get to unilaterally pull this stunt.
- piaste 5y ago> I doubt you would want murderers advertise for their cause on Facebook. Why not? The Unabomber Manifesto is freely available, and I would not want it censored by private parties. If anyone should decide that "this content constitutes a dangerous incitement to murder and cannot be allowed to stay online", it should be a duly appointed court, not some random Facebook employees or contractors.
- _Algernon_ 5y agoPersonal politics is bickering about the tax rate, not defending war crimes. It is insane that people are pretending that these issues are equivalent.
- frereubu 5y agoThis is a pretty extreme form of amoral nihilism given the situation in Ukraine.
- 5y ago
- freebuju 5y agoIronic that this may be the only somewhat reasonable set of sanctions to come from the corpo side yet.
- frmerycfnder 5y agoWhy did they ever allow this? Oh right, Yuri Milner gave Facebook hundreds of millions of dollars, given to him by Putin.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- dessant 5y agoMeta Platforms, absolute scum. They're giving a platform for far-right political groups across the EU, therefore aiding their operation. We have reported several popular Facebook groups, pages and profiles that spread hateful content, some of them the official pages of far-right politicians. Absolutely nothing is taken down if the content is not in English, and the influence of these entities are growing by the day on Facebook. Facebook rarely takes down non-English content that breaks their terms of service. Meta Platforms simply does not care. The attention of the media is focused on English content, and Meta only reacts in a meaningful way when they're called out in major news stories. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5jtFqWq5iU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5jtFqWq5iU Meta Platforms was fine with aiding the radicalization of the Russian population in the past decade, and it will continue to do nothing, except offer token concessions to insert itself in the news cycle for cheap PR wins.
- Lascaille 5y ago>We have reported >the official pages of far-right politicians That seems anti-democratic of you. Don't you believe in people being able to vote for things you don't agree with?
- frereubu 5y ago> that spread hateful content This is the key bit, not the far-right bit. Depends rather on what OP considers "hateful content" though.
- politician 5y ago
- dessant 5y agoThey obviously hijack the political themes that they think will resonate with the population, but that should not lead to you looking with crossed eyes to any comment that discusses far-right radicalization on social media.
- somehnacct3757 5y agoSo I guess this whole time Facebook could tell which ads were funded by Russian state media and they were happy to take the money. Or, they have no way of knowing so this is an empty threat. Neither is a good look.
- stuaxo 5y agoGiven that most of the Russian funded stuff on there is not directly by their state media, this achieves very very little.
- IYasha 5y agoIt's (un)funny to see all those "we're not into politics" services taking action now. Trust noone.
- Infinitesimus 5y agoI don't think it's a trust issue. They stayed neutral for a while and were criticized for not doing enough by mainstream media, the logical outcome is that they remove and ban more content.
- nest0r 5y agoThey are not into politics, they are into money. If 90% of the world is against a war you can make more profit catering to them. Nothing personal, kid.