4 ms·

Facebook and Google are too big for democracy

25 points by johndfsgdgdfg 5y ago

bediger4000 5y ago
That's probably true, but it leaves out a lot of other companies. It's worth examining the reasons for stopping at those 2.
quantified 5y ago
I’d like to see Citibank, Goldman Sachs, and all of the oil majors and aerospace and media behemoths examined. The influence they have on behavior of elected officials is at least as pernicious. Doesn’t matter who is elected or appointed if they behave according to the largest money.
- peakaboo 5y ago
  Those companies do not track and save private search information about every human on the planet. Google can affect what every human thinks about anything, because they control the worlds information. Nobody really understood the full power of a search engine that becomes a near monopoly until it happened.
  - hulitu 5y ago
    > Those companies do not track and save private search information about every human on the planet But they can buy it.
  - quantified 5y ago
    I’ll suggest a way of looking at things here. Google isn’t faking research results, creating misleading or false videos or texts about people behavior, sentiments, or world events. Nor is Facebook. Instead, people are. The problem is with the people who produce them in the first place (similar to those who sell fentanyl or have a bag of stolen watches to sell). If those people used the phone instead, should we be blaming Verizon and AT&T? (Hint, they probably do use the phone. Even the Mob used the phone, no one suggested shutting Ma Bell down.) But it’s easier to blame the messenger than the scribe of the messages. Meanwhile, back to democracy: in what way does the outcome of an election affect the actual votes by the Congress and state legislatures? Lifetime appointments, yes, the D and R tribes pick different ideologues for the courts. It can easily seem like impactful decisions are influenced more by lobbying and money than by retail voters.
tormock 5y ago
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

25 points by johndfsgdgdfg 5y ago

That's probably true, but it leaves out a lot of other companies. It's worth examining the reasons for stopping at those 2.

quantified 5y ago

I’d like to see Citibank, Goldman Sachs, and all of the oil majors and aerospace and media behemoths examined. The influence they have on behavior of elected officials is at least as pernicious. Doesn’t matter who is elected or appointed if they behave according to the largest money.

peakaboo 5y ago
Those companies do not track and save private search information about every human on the planet. Google can affect what every human thinks about anything, because they control the worlds information. Nobody really understood the full power of a search engine that becomes a near monopoly until it happened.
- hulitu 5y ago
  > Those companies do not track and save private search information about every human on the planet But they can buy it.
- quantified 5y ago
  I’ll suggest a way of looking at things here. Google isn’t faking research results, creating misleading or false videos or texts about people behavior, sentiments, or world events. Nor is Facebook. Instead, people are. The problem is with the people who produce them in the first place (similar to those who sell fentanyl or have a bag of stolen watches to sell). If those people used the phone instead, should we be blaming Verizon and AT&T? (Hint, they probably do use the phone. Even the Mob used the phone, no one suggested shutting Ma Bell down.) But it’s easier to blame the messenger than the scribe of the messages. Meanwhile, back to democracy: in what way does the outcome of an election affect the actual votes by the Congress and state legislatures? Lifetime appointments, yes, the D and R tribes pick different ideologues for the courts. It can easily seem like impactful decisions are influenced more by lobbying and money than by retail voters.

tormock 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]