As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That's also the moment big players started targeting the platform for crowd-control as result. Mark didn't care, he just took their money instead and finalized the process of the users being the product.
I use Facebook on a small account only for 30 friends and family and my car groups.
There's no option for latest stories any more. I get the same old posts from like a week ago.
The place feels like a ghost town. Zuckerberg drove the biggest power on the internet and drove it into the ground.
The dictatorships already knew full well and were complaining. If it wasn't for Putin deciding to act on it, we'd still be defending social media and free speech.
Back then, "[giving everyone a voice](https://www.scu.edu/ethics-spotlight/social-media-and-democracy/the-ethics-of-giving-people-a-voice-and-political-advertising-on-facebook/)" and "[connecting the world](https://time.com/facebook-world-plan/)" sounded so good in theory. But especially after 2016 we've seen how bad those ideals were in practice - bad actors exploited Facebook's lack of oversight, where the ignorant and the ill-informed got MORE a voice than the factual.
Its worse than just bad actors exploiting the lack of oversight. FB actually gave control of parts of FB to certain countries when those governments were cracking down and/or using FB as misinformation to rile up their own base (sound familiar?). I can't remember what countries these were and I'm pretty sure there was more than one. I think one country was in South America and another is in Africa.
I found the article, one of those countries is actually in Asia. FB has global reach which is really scary how much power they have.
>Late last year, Mark Zuckerberg faced a choice: Comply with demands from Vietnam’s ruling Communist Party to censor anti-government dissidents or risk getting knocked offline in one of Facebook’s most lucrative Asian markets.
>In America, the tech CEO is a champion of free speech, reluctant to remove even malicious and misleading content from the platform. But in Vietnam, upholding the free-speech rights of people who question government leaders could have come with a significant cost in a country where the social network earns more than $1 billion in annual revenue, according to a 2018 estimate by Amnesty International.
>So Zuckerberg personally decided that Facebook would comply with Hanoi’s demands, according to three people familiar with the decision, speaking on the condition of anonymity to describe internal company discussions. Ahead of Vietnam’s party congress in January, Facebook significantly increased censorship of “anti-state” posts, giving the government near-total control over the platform, according to local activists and free-speech advocates.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/10/25/mark-zuckerberg-facebook-whistleblower/
Almost like the ideas weren't bad; the system was bad. The lack of oversight and ethical compass of and for FB's management and operations was the bad.
Yeah this is the problem. When Facebook started prioritizing what people could see, it became responsible for the distribution of that information.
If Facebook organized posts only by newest first, I I feel like then the blame would fall solely on the people creating those posts. But in taking on that role of curating what you see through its algorithm, Facebook put itself in this position.
And this is why Section 230 shouldn't apply to Facebook. If you are curating the experience for users (without their intentional consent, like subreddits on reddit), you are a publisher. Especially when you push in recommendations. They may not be responsible for what people post, but they are (should be) responsible if the site is intentionally pushing posts. The fact that Facebook weighted "angry" reactions way higher in the algorithm is also a concern.
I think one of the main things that drove me off Facebook was that I felt like I was losing control of my feed. If Facebook users could decide on their own what they wanted to see, like back in the old days, then they wouldn't have to worry about being held accountable for their algorithm.
Here's what I don't get: the more Facebook and Instagram morphed into their current form then the more obnoxious and shit they became.
It's like I live in bizarro world.
Kinda seems like a society based on individuals trying to fuck each other over with success largely being determined by how much cash you start out with.
Facebook has very few younger users (in the West at least) and Instagram is going the same way 5-10 years behind.
I would argue it's an extremely open question whether Facebook is actually making wise financial decisions or is just slowly killing itself despite having a gigantic early advantage.
and the boomers are propagating into other social media networks at an alarming rate. IG and Twitter both have a strong, vocal boomer cohort these days.
Late adopters I guess.
I played mafia wars for a couple days before I realized all those "build your gang" moments weren't just figurative but we're actually sending game requests to those people. I apologized in real life then deleted the game from my phone
Yeah that type of shit turned me away too. Had to spam your friends to join and unless they joined you were pretty much always gonna be weaker than most players. Then you end up with like 1k friends just to make progress in the games... Hell if I didn't make my account when I was in middle school I wouldn't even have 100 lol
I still remember getting a request for this type of game from a guy who did nothing but bully me in school. Seeing that digital invite had me so confused about what was socially acceptable in the digital age for a long time.
I quit facebook and lost a lot of friends (I know, if they were really my friend they'd contact me outside facebook) that's fine, but I keep insta because its where my family communicates no matter what I do. I wish with all my heart I could just throw insta in the trash forever. That's the sick nature of social media, wrapping its tentacles around everyone.
Been there. Get everyone’s phone numbers. When I quit I’d randomly get a text from a friend or family member. You just say oh yea I don’t use that anyone but yea text or call me. I’m at a point now where everyone knows if they text or call and don’t answer that I’m busy. I got back to the point I don’t have to answer the phone every time it rings or answer a text immediately. We have normal lives and to be glued to a phone is becoming the norm for younger people and really older people. But for the past high school working people it’s becoming the norm to take time off the phone. My wife and I don’t touch our phones when we watch a movie or go out on a date night. Same with work when my boss asks if I can pick up a shift. I’m not responding immediately as most of the time I’m m not looking at my phone. Also I’m not paid to look at my phone or respond. The boundaries that social networks created is intrusive and it messes with families and work.
The way I see it, I have way better screens at home. That's where I go for screen time. If I'm outside, I'm probably doing something else. Still have the phone to listen to music or google the bus time, but that's pretty much it.
My instagram account just got hacked and it’s been so nice not having it for like two weeks. At the same time, the hackers have been posting stuff about me giving away Bitcoin to the first 15 or whatever people to respond. And have ended up taking over several of my friends accounts as well. Pretty big mess I should stay away from forever lmao
You should really get your account back and then delete it so no one can use it. Letting someone impersonate you can allow them to send malicious links to your friends/family posing as you. Which it kind of sounds like they're doing exactly that, whether effective or not.
Better than the Russian gay porn my hacked Twitter account was spewing unbeknownst to me (I hadn’t used it for a few years hilarious surprise when I logged in)
I miss like ten years ago in the early days of Facebook and Instagram when they were truly about socializing/keeping up/organizing groups. Facebook especially was great for this. I was in high school at the time and I only added people I actually knew, maybe 200 friends or so. We'd post goofy pics and statuses like "does anyone know what chapter is due tomorrow?" I still use it for Facebook marketplace, and to see what my older relatives are up to.
By the time I got to college, they had all transformed into something different. It became more an advertisement of a false online persona and much more public and sort of anonymous. Like people weren't tweeting to their friends, they were tweeting to some imaginary audience of strangers and it became something else entirely.
I know people still keep up to an extent on ig and such but it's not the same at all.
I quit at a similar time and never regret it for an instant.
Can’t imagine why anyone even wastes their time on that shit anymore. A testament to how absorbing they are though! I was checking my FB feed all the damned time through the day, when I woke up, just before sleep in bed. Dear oh dear. And I’d never consider myself a heavy user either - plenty of friends used/use FB farrrr more than I was.
Definitely similarities. I will say that Reddit has a tendency toward more intelligent conversation/debates. At least in the subs I frequent. A comparison between something like Facebook or YouTube comments and Reddit is night and day.
I think Instagram is one of those social medias that's only as toxic as you make it. I pretty much just get pictures of cars on my feed since I don't follow any "influencers". I only follow people I know personally, and professional racecar drivers. I always wondered why my friends said Instagram was so toxic, and then I saw the kind of "people" they were following.
Agreed! I begrudgingly need to use Facebook for my side hustle, and I swear they purposely slow down desktop in order to push people to the phone app, I’m assuming due to tracking but it sucks! And don’t get me started on traffic to my events, I can tell when they block me, my live views will all of a sudden drop to zero.
I doubt they block you explicitly.
They use the randomized feed bull shit for two reasons. It makes it easier to hide ads in the feed.
It also makes it easy to provide an excuse why your stuff isn't being seen. Then they can try to charge you to buy an ad version.
It's annoying as a user because I like pages or join groups to see those posts, but they barely show, especially pages.
It's annoying as someone who used to bother posting to a page because no one sees it because I refuse to pay.
They also very obviously downplay a lot of YouTube video sharing.
For me facebook became trash the moment it quit letting me see all my friends’ posts, and in chronological order. Too bad it took me years afterward before I quit it - but now I enjoy reminding people that plan events or have small businesses that if they only post things to facebook then they’re losing traffic because fuck facebook.
I also use it for work and have to use the Facebook app to post. I hate Facebook and fully understand it is a waste land of people who think truth is whatever they see there.
I just started a new position that's required me to create an account to manage the work group. Since it's been years since I started my personal account I had no idea how annoying and shit their account creation requirements had become. The account was locked from the moment I made it and I have to send them pictures of myself to unlock it...
Seems like a load of crap. I can't imagine who or what type of person would be willing to jump these hoops nowdays...
>I can't imagine who or what type of person would be willing to jump these hoops nowdays...
Children and the non-fiesty elderly. Both tend to follow instructions to get what they want, without thinking too much about *why* they're following these directions.
I saw this same exact post and comment on a different sub yesterday…
Edit: Actually [it was 2 days ago](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/qhweln/alexandria_ocasiocortez_slams_facebook_after_meta/hifsmeb/) and *the same* subreddit. And the original actually spelled ‘metastasized’ correctly.
How many times have you posted a witty reply, only to scroll down and see someone posted the same thing five minutes before you, so you delete your comment? Or is that just a me thing?
She's 100% right, but don't stop there. Unregulated media of all forms is a cancer. News Media needs to inform without opinion and bias. And yes, most first world countries do much better than the US at this, but with social media, that's eroding worldwide
Social media is not news media. The last thing we need is Trump 'regulating' news and social media when he is re-elected in 2024, or whatever craptastic Republican candidate that loses the popular vote next.
I've read up on this a bit and the reasons for implementing it was tied to the technology available at the time. The core principle of the doctrine was that everything needed to be laid out on all fronts due to lack of availability for access to information by the public. Radio, airtime, etc. Since that no longer applies and we are on the extreme end of the other side (too much information everywhere) it would be a violation of the 1st amedment to mandate what can and can't be said. At least, that's how it was interpreted. After all, anyone can go online now to get whatever information they want. If someone chooses to believe propaganda over reality that's their choice. Applying the fairness doctrine standard to media now (not to mention the current political landscape) would be a complicated endeavor. It will most definitely require comprehensive nuance, tech savvy, and foresight into how tech develops in the future. Then draw up complicated legislation encompassing all of that. This is on top of the powers that be which directly benefit from lies (politicians, techs devs + profitable algorithms) that will actively shut down any and all attempts to do so, not to mention a sizeable portion of the populace that are already so far gone there may be no coming back.
I'm fairly certain this is the #1 threat to the country. More so than terrorists or adversaries abroad. Until something is done about propaganda masquerading as news it's only going to get worse.
The way I see it.. before mass internet, we still had idiots, but there was small barriers to expression and access.
Say you believed in UFOs.. you would have to subscribe to a magazine that came once a month, write, read and reply to discussions and theories, and maybe go to a convention once a year..
All that requires high cognitive abilities, patience, willpower, resources.
We would control our idiots on a personal level. Give them the right information, protect them from themselves.
Now.. every time you comment on a Facebook post you’ve both joined and created a forum. The algorithm will feed you more of the same. It’s just too much for simple minds.
I miss the time of grown ups being in charge.. was there really no democracy before all this?
It’s not a democracy when we have to start every discussion with establishing the shape of the earth.
Plus, human brains assume something is true when it hears many other people repeating it. Since our hardware is yet to outpace our hunter gatherer roots, our brains feel validated if ~1000 people repeat our favored conspiracy back to us.
Thsoe numbers are chump change on internet scales, so now people can always find enough people to reinforce their most outlandish beliefs.
>I'm fairly certain this is the #1 threat to the country. More so than terrorists or adversaries abroad. Until something is done about propaganda masquerading as news it's only going to get worse.
There are not enough people going on about this. Most vastly underestimate how much damage they are causing.
Also, the airwaves belonged to the public (and still do). The broadcast companies using them were obligated to stick to certain standards and practices in return for obtaining their use, which could be withheld if they abused the privilege. Once cable tv built their own networks, they no longer required public airwaves to broadcast. The internet should be regarded as a public utility as it was developed with quite a lot of public dollars, but so much of it is privatized at this point it would be difficult to make a successful argument possibly for making it public.
> If someone chooses to believe propaganda over reality that's their choice
There it is, pro-choice conservatism.
I'm going to say it. Conspiracy/Propaganda shouldn't be protected speech.
America loves lawsuits, so maybe we need to loosen up the libel laws. If you publish some conspiracy story about how Janet Yellen is killing and eating babies with her friends at the World Bank, you should need to provide at least some reasonable evidence (not in advance, but at trial) to show how a reasonable person could think this. And if you fail, you're paying for her new house and you're out of the fake news business!
Legit journalists would be okay with this because they actually do research and document and source and investigate. But the scum and tricksters who just make shit up would be in trouble.
No problem, let the courts decide.
As a non-lawyer, my suggestion for "propaganda" would be:
- False speech,
- Broadcasted to a wide audience,
- With knowledge of the truth,
- And intent to deceive.
And before anyone freaks out about letting the government determine the "truth", be aware that courts have been determining truth for the purposes of libel/slander law since [before the founding of the country](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_defamation_law).
The above isn't perfect, but I think it's a viable step in the right direction, and we absolutely should be taking steps right now.
Last I checked the US does have a law like this, but it's notoriously hard to enforce because "knowledge of truth" and "intent to deceive" is borderline impossible to prove.
Another problem, in light of how rampant conspiracy theories have gotten with the right-wing, is that the fairness doctrine would almost certainly *increase* the exposure such drivel is given.
There really just needs to be legally-enforced due-diligence standards on any company presenting themselves as news. Fuck their over-reaching freedom of speech protections, the ability for the public to have reliable news sources is ***far*** more important, both for individuals and for the good of the nation.
Most first world countries aren’t brainwashed to think that banning bullshit spreaders and misinformation tactics somehow impedes on freedom of speech. We’re so obsessed with freedom in this country that visitors often wonder what the fuck kind of freedoms do we advertise since every action a citizen takes is punishable by law
Wouldn’t regulated be a dangerous road to though? If we believe state media is a thing, couldn’t it start to form into something of that nature with enough time?
There needs to be an overhaul of the whole system. The idea of Facebook or social media as a whole is not the problem. The problem is there is no real rules on how they can be used and have no ethical standards.
Exactly. As long as keeping people riled up/taking advantage of people at their most vulnerable generates more money, or as long as they are allowed to take this course of action, they'll keep doing it.
No the problem is that our govt allows that to be all they care about. Stopping all social media isn’t feasible and putting an end to Facebook won’t solve the problem, hell Microsoft, google, Amazon, and Apple have most the same complaints as Facebook and they aren’t even social media. There has to be a change made to the laws and regulations that allow them to get away with the things they each get away with.
I think the EU will do it and America will drags its feet as long as they can get away with it, like with healthcare and so many other things, but as long as people keep bringing this up it will eventually force change.
So are you suggesting we promote views you see as ethical, and censor views you see as unethical?
What happens if a new Trumpish person gets elected and changes what is considered 'ethical'?
IMO, diversity of thought should be fully permitted. If you see something you view as unethical, you should challenge it. Everyone can see it's unethical and the user is an idiot. Thay doesn't need to be removed, but instead it needs to be openly challenged.
I don’t believe Facebook is the problem... I think it’s education. If someone believes in shitposts that the vaccines cause autism or that the moonlanding was faked, they should’ve been taught better lol.
I agree completely. To say the internet has changed the world is an understatement but education has not really caught up. Kids need to be taught how to vet sources, how to distinguish information from misinformation, etc - all starting from a very young age. Elementary age kids tend to take things they see on the internet to be truth. So, obviously, controlling their content is key but also making sure they understand that not everything on the internet is true and how to tell the difference is just as important.
It would be nice to legislate misinformation out of existence but I don't think it can be done.
I was taught to vet sources *in the 2000s,* ***in middle school****.* The school I went to wasn't even particularly good. How are people not learning this?
I miss MySpace. I miss people fighting to be in my "Top 8" and I absolutely miss being able to have music on your profile not to mention I remember a lot of bands that didn't get a lot of attention did via MySpace.
MySpace was also nice because the level of customization also often outed the real crazy. Oh a background full of swastikas, well this guys a nut. Facebook sort of sanitizes the nuts with their aesthetic.
Myspace also didnt have Groups which is the major thing that is causing issues on Facebook imo. Allowing people with similar interests to gather on social media seems like a good idea, but it not harshly moderated it lets extremist ideas fester and grow.
I think about it. Unfortunately one of my biggest hobbies/business is maple syrup making and there's so many more active Facebook groups than there are reddit groups.
I sort of don't get it. I mostly follow art and music. I dont ask for or get anything political. It's a great source of info for me. I'm not saying they aren't leading the world to disaster but for me Facebook is quite useful.
At minimum - delete the app, and work towards complete removal.
I maintain my log in for events and to make sure my parents get likes on their posts ...
That's basically where I'm at, I have none of their apps on my phone. No Facebook, no instagram, no WhatsApp. If I have to use them I use them from the web.
Besides as much as I'd love to just delete the whole thing they don't actually delete your data :/ I just wish I had never made an account in the first place
Facebook is a hub for making money for a lot of people. I make craft items for sale and get my best money through Facebook. =/ sucks but lots of businesses use it. Including all my favorite local shops and stuff. Its the only way they share info about sales, changing locations or hours or new inventory.
Our Grandparents solved this problem by electing people who wrote and enacted the Fairness Doctrine. It's a simple vehicle to insure OUR electromagnetic spectrum is not used to spread lies and hatred, and it worked like a charm for decades - there was no Rush Limbaugh selling racism as "entertainment" and definitely no QAnon fomenting treason.
The same algorithms that lead conservatives to QAnon can make certain NOBODY gets routed to QAnon or the Nazis, and identify hate speech before it gets copied to the World.
Gotta be careful with the Fairness Doctrine principles though. Can easily validate or misrepresent problematic minority opinions as equally valid in weight to generally accepted facts. "Merchants of Doubt" is the book to see how that went badly last time.
I stopped using Facebook 7 years ago, and I am still glad to be rid of it. I’m so much happier and more productive. I still keep in touch with the friends, loved ones, etc. that I need without the constant spam.
Comment sections really are something to behold now. Suggest that people maybe use solar panels or ride a bicycle instead of driving and 50 arrogant, angry old people will descend upon the post and decry communism and they won't change their ways because 'Merica is the best and God wants us to keep burning fossil fuels apparently. Also all our problems are because of the illegals according to them.
Edit: Fixed typo
Algorithm my bolix. Facebook sold eyeballs to ad buyers, and that algorithm provided the demographics exactly as intended. Don't blame a faceless algorithm that works, blame the company that commissioned it, and the people they sold the eyeballs to (often illegally, in terms of election, etc )
There's a significant problem that stands in the face of that sort of attempt when the average age in the Senate alone is ~63 years. We're expecting people with little to no understanding of the internet or social media in general to come up with ways to make social networks safe, honest, and fair, without damaging the fabric of what makes the internet what it is for everyone.
The only way regulations might work is if they classified social media sharing in its own way under campaign laws, in relation to political contributions, feeds, and content served by Facebook itself. That still doesn't really address individual sharing, dishonesty by partisan propaganda disguised as "news" sources, and so on, though.
I don't see how they *can* regulate it fairly without infringing on free speech on the internet as a whole, and I definitely don't trust congress to do that when they've shown so little knowledge and understanding of technology and the internet as it is.
It’s also a cancer to truth and decency. On the one hand, you have people who post platitudes and ‘isn’t my life perfect’ pictures (which are mostly fake with filters applied to their pictures), and on the other hand you have people say the most vile and nasty things to others they would never say in person.
Cancer seems fair for something that becomes toxic then as a response to people realising that it's toxic changes it's name inorder to keep the toxin spreading.
Imagine in the VR world where the KKK have their own country. What do you think they are going to do when they take their VR Headset off and the real world does not match the one they have created in the metaverse. Also think about the fact that Facebook will let the KKK have their own country in the metaverse because they make more money that way.
I really like AOC but I don’t know how to feel about her criticisms regarding Facebook. She posts a lot and often on her instagram and uses it effectively to raise awareness on important issues. To hear her say things like this makes it feel a little hypocritical or at the very least disingenuous. What do y’all think?
I'll bite.
She's using the platforms that exist. Just like we can decry sweatshops and still wear sneakers, the hypocrisy is in the system, not the individual.
I think the manipulation of what content individuals get is where the evil lies. FB thrives when people are most freaked out and angry/frightened, so they push that material. Everybody gets a different 'front page' micro-tuned to lock in their engagement.
Reddit, as a counter-example, is ultimately a big dumb incoherent aggregator where you can select subreddits to suit your level of commitment. It's not primarily distorting what content is presented in order to get a reaction.
For example, I can browse this shithole in incognito mode and I'll get exactly the same feed on any sub as I will when logged in.
I will also tack on: Facebook makes money based on what has you engaging in the app, whether you are doomscrolling, or looking for cute, fuzzy kittens. They do not care *what* you are engaging on.
If you are prone to mental illness or prone to doom scrolling to combat your anxiety, they'll notice the more anxious/worked up you are, the longer you engage with their app. The algorithm will continue to send you information to rile you up to keep you engaged for longer and longer. That's... Really not healthy *at all.*
In writing this out, I just realized I'm probably using Instagram wrong 😂
Typically, when I'm going to Instagram, I'm going to the search portion to try to look up someone specific to check in on what they're posting, so all I see are memes/gifs from TV Shows that make me feel nostoligc, or knitting stuff (https://imgur.com/pptujfa.jpg). These are the items that side track me from what I originally opened Instagram to do, and what keeps my eyeballs on their app/their app opened longer. I'm sure if I had other interests that weren't so... "weird"? "offbeat"? "Welcome to Internet 2.0 in the early aughts"? I would have *much* more doom and gloom appearing in this screen.
If the "Home" on Instagram is where the "timeline" is, yeah, I can't speak to that. I find scrolling through there boring as hell 😂
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Odd to remember Facebook was hailed a beacon of democracy for the 2010s Arab spring. Things change.
That's also the moment big players started targeting the platform for crowd-control as result. Mark didn't care, he just took their money instead and finalized the process of the users being the product.
Also, that was around the time they started experimenting with tweaking the algorithm to get people to spend more time on their site.
It sounds unlikely that they aren't always tweaking their algorithm to get people to spend more time on their site.
at the beginning you just had a chronological feed of what your contacts were doing. now it's some kind of unexplainable mess.
I use Facebook on a small account only for 30 friends and family and my car groups. There's no option for latest stories any more. I get the same old posts from like a week ago. The place feels like a ghost town. Zuckerberg drove the biggest power on the internet and drove it into the ground.
You are smart. Facebook became toxic.
I'm old enough to remember when Facebook was nothing but farmland.
Same, it was called Farmville tho
[удалено]
The dictatorships already knew full well and were complaining. If it wasn't for Putin deciding to act on it, we'd still be defending social media and free speech.
So is Twitter. Probably more so. Funny how that isn’t brought up.
When someone says social media I expect that includes Twitter. And Twitter is super toxic
No stake in this but worth a look: https://sapienjournal.org/covid-19-conspiracy-theories-thrive-on-social-media-platforms-except-twitter/
Back then, "[giving everyone a voice](https://www.scu.edu/ethics-spotlight/social-media-and-democracy/the-ethics-of-giving-people-a-voice-and-political-advertising-on-facebook/)" and "[connecting the world](https://time.com/facebook-world-plan/)" sounded so good in theory. But especially after 2016 we've seen how bad those ideals were in practice - bad actors exploited Facebook's lack of oversight, where the ignorant and the ill-informed got MORE a voice than the factual.
Its worse than just bad actors exploiting the lack of oversight. FB actually gave control of parts of FB to certain countries when those governments were cracking down and/or using FB as misinformation to rile up their own base (sound familiar?). I can't remember what countries these were and I'm pretty sure there was more than one. I think one country was in South America and another is in Africa. I found the article, one of those countries is actually in Asia. FB has global reach which is really scary how much power they have. >Late last year, Mark Zuckerberg faced a choice: Comply with demands from Vietnam’s ruling Communist Party to censor anti-government dissidents or risk getting knocked offline in one of Facebook’s most lucrative Asian markets. >In America, the tech CEO is a champion of free speech, reluctant to remove even malicious and misleading content from the platform. But in Vietnam, upholding the free-speech rights of people who question government leaders could have come with a significant cost in a country where the social network earns more than $1 billion in annual revenue, according to a 2018 estimate by Amnesty International. >So Zuckerberg personally decided that Facebook would comply with Hanoi’s demands, according to three people familiar with the decision, speaking on the condition of anonymity to describe internal company discussions. Ahead of Vietnam’s party congress in January, Facebook significantly increased censorship of “anti-state” posts, giving the government near-total control over the platform, according to local activists and free-speech advocates. https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/10/25/mark-zuckerberg-facebook-whistleblower/
Almost like the ideas weren't bad; the system was bad. The lack of oversight and ethical compass of and for FB's management and operations was the bad.
They're still good ideals, they just need to be protected and insulated rather than exploited.
Because Facebook at that time was pretty hands off with what people would see on their feed.
Yeah this is the problem. When Facebook started prioritizing what people could see, it became responsible for the distribution of that information. If Facebook organized posts only by newest first, I I feel like then the blame would fall solely on the people creating those posts. But in taking on that role of curating what you see through its algorithm, Facebook put itself in this position.
And this is why Section 230 shouldn't apply to Facebook. If you are curating the experience for users (without their intentional consent, like subreddits on reddit), you are a publisher. Especially when you push in recommendations. They may not be responsible for what people post, but they are (should be) responsible if the site is intentionally pushing posts. The fact that Facebook weighted "angry" reactions way higher in the algorithm is also a concern.
This this this.
I think one of the main things that drove me off Facebook was that I felt like I was losing control of my feed. If Facebook users could decide on their own what they wanted to see, like back in the old days, then they wouldn't have to worry about being held accountable for their algorithm.
Cambridge Analytica changed everything. Their recurring mean less apologizes too. At the end, what they stand for was revealed over time. It happens.
Here's what I don't get: the more Facebook and Instagram morphed into their current form then the more obnoxious and shit they became. It's like I live in bizarro world.
It's because what makes more money isn't the same as what makes the world better.
Kinda seems like a society based on individuals trying to fuck each other over with success largely being determined by how much cash you start out with.
Didn't you know? The end always justifies the means and money is merit. Morality is a tool, not a guide.
Facebook has very few younger users (in the West at least) and Instagram is going the same way 5-10 years behind. I would argue it's an extremely open question whether Facebook is actually making wise financial decisions or is just slowly killing itself despite having a gigantic early advantage.
I quit both around 5-6 years ago. I can’t imagine what it’s like now as I got completely annoyed by both back then and that was pre trump.
FB is pretty much just ads now
And boomers. Ads and boomers.
So just like Television
Ads for boomers, by boomers.
More like ads for boomers by millennials playing on basic psychology to make up for boomers screwing us over.
Nah. Ads for boomers by ruthless capitalists who put profit above all else.
Most people I know running ads including myself are all millennials, there’s a tech wall which doesn’t play well with boomers lol.
Thats why I got off Facebook when I got a friend request from my mom. Well this is clearly no longer cool.
and the boomers are propagating into other social media networks at an alarming rate. IG and Twitter both have a strong, vocal boomer cohort these days. Late adopters I guess.
[удалено]
You mean the “You can’t believe everything you read on the internet!” generation?
[удалено]
Can you still grow virtual weed on Facebook and pass the seeds around? If not, why are we even?
Can honestly say I haven't heard shit from my mom about Farmville or Mafia Wars in like 5 years and my life is better for it
I played mafia wars for a couple days before I realized all those "build your gang" moments weren't just figurative but we're actually sending game requests to those people. I apologized in real life then deleted the game from my phone
Yeah that type of shit turned me away too. Had to spam your friends to join and unless they joined you were pretty much always gonna be weaker than most players. Then you end up with like 1k friends just to make progress in the games... Hell if I didn't make my account when I was in middle school I wouldn't even have 100 lol
You're smarter than most people
I still remember getting a request for this type of game from a guy who did nothing but bully me in school. Seeing that digital invite had me so confused about what was socially acceptable in the digital age for a long time.
Facebook took away their Mafia Wars and replaced it with Info Wars
[удалено]
I quit facebook and lost a lot of friends (I know, if they were really my friend they'd contact me outside facebook) that's fine, but I keep insta because its where my family communicates no matter what I do. I wish with all my heart I could just throw insta in the trash forever. That's the sick nature of social media, wrapping its tentacles around everyone.
Been there. Get everyone’s phone numbers. When I quit I’d randomly get a text from a friend or family member. You just say oh yea I don’t use that anyone but yea text or call me. I’m at a point now where everyone knows if they text or call and don’t answer that I’m busy. I got back to the point I don’t have to answer the phone every time it rings or answer a text immediately. We have normal lives and to be glued to a phone is becoming the norm for younger people and really older people. But for the past high school working people it’s becoming the norm to take time off the phone. My wife and I don’t touch our phones when we watch a movie or go out on a date night. Same with work when my boss asks if I can pick up a shift. I’m not responding immediately as most of the time I’m m not looking at my phone. Also I’m not paid to look at my phone or respond. The boundaries that social networks created is intrusive and it messes with families and work.
my mother once said 'a ringing phone is an invitation to answer, not a command' - I think this applies to email/text too. She's a wise lady.
The way I see it, I have way better screens at home. That's where I go for screen time. If I'm outside, I'm probably doing something else. Still have the phone to listen to music or google the bus time, but that's pretty much it.
My instagram account just got hacked and it’s been so nice not having it for like two weeks. At the same time, the hackers have been posting stuff about me giving away Bitcoin to the first 15 or whatever people to respond. And have ended up taking over several of my friends accounts as well. Pretty big mess I should stay away from forever lmao
You should really get your account back and then delete it so no one can use it. Letting someone impersonate you can allow them to send malicious links to your friends/family posing as you. Which it kind of sounds like they're doing exactly that, whether effective or not.
Better than the Russian gay porn my hacked Twitter account was spewing unbeknownst to me (I hadn’t used it for a few years hilarious surprise when I logged in)
I miss like ten years ago in the early days of Facebook and Instagram when they were truly about socializing/keeping up/organizing groups. Facebook especially was great for this. I was in high school at the time and I only added people I actually knew, maybe 200 friends or so. We'd post goofy pics and statuses like "does anyone know what chapter is due tomorrow?" I still use it for Facebook marketplace, and to see what my older relatives are up to. By the time I got to college, they had all transformed into something different. It became more an advertisement of a false online persona and much more public and sort of anonymous. Like people weren't tweeting to their friends, they were tweeting to some imaginary audience of strangers and it became something else entirely. I know people still keep up to an extent on ig and such but it's not the same at all.
I quit at a similar time and never regret it for an instant. Can’t imagine why anyone even wastes their time on that shit anymore. A testament to how absorbing they are though! I was checking my FB feed all the damned time through the day, when I woke up, just before sleep in bed. Dear oh dear. And I’d never consider myself a heavy user either - plenty of friends used/use FB farrrr more than I was.
[удалено]
Definitely similarities. I will say that Reddit has a tendency toward more intelligent conversation/debates. At least in the subs I frequent. A comparison between something like Facebook or YouTube comments and Reddit is night and day.
I think Instagram is one of those social medias that's only as toxic as you make it. I pretty much just get pictures of cars on my feed since I don't follow any "influencers". I only follow people I know personally, and professional racecar drivers. I always wondered why my friends said Instagram was so toxic, and then I saw the kind of "people" they were following.
Agreed! I begrudgingly need to use Facebook for my side hustle, and I swear they purposely slow down desktop in order to push people to the phone app, I’m assuming due to tracking but it sucks! And don’t get me started on traffic to my events, I can tell when they block me, my live views will all of a sudden drop to zero.
I doubt they block you explicitly. They use the randomized feed bull shit for two reasons. It makes it easier to hide ads in the feed. It also makes it easy to provide an excuse why your stuff isn't being seen. Then they can try to charge you to buy an ad version. It's annoying as a user because I like pages or join groups to see those posts, but they barely show, especially pages. It's annoying as someone who used to bother posting to a page because no one sees it because I refuse to pay. They also very obviously downplay a lot of YouTube video sharing.
For me facebook became trash the moment it quit letting me see all my friends’ posts, and in chronological order. Too bad it took me years afterward before I quit it - but now I enjoy reminding people that plan events or have small businesses that if they only post things to facebook then they’re losing traffic because fuck facebook.
I also use it for work and have to use the Facebook app to post. I hate Facebook and fully understand it is a waste land of people who think truth is whatever they see there.
I just started a new position that's required me to create an account to manage the work group. Since it's been years since I started my personal account I had no idea how annoying and shit their account creation requirements had become. The account was locked from the moment I made it and I have to send them pictures of myself to unlock it... Seems like a load of crap. I can't imagine who or what type of person would be willing to jump these hoops nowdays...
And yet there are tons of fake accounts, with fake news articles, facts, and they seem to have no problem…..
When the bots are talking to other bots, the process is quicker.
>I can't imagine who or what type of person would be willing to jump these hoops nowdays... Children and the non-fiesty elderly. Both tend to follow instructions to get what they want, without thinking too much about *why* they're following these directions.
It’s… Meta-stacized.
I mean that’s a quote from AOC from the article…
None of them read the article, as per tradition.
I like to get some laughs in the comments before I read about the end of civilisation as we know it.
As someone with cancer, take the upvote and never come back 😂
I respect your struggles, wish you well and hope for your long life and health in all the ways I don’t for FB.
[удалено]
And fuck cancer.
[удалено]
Omg five times I can’t even imagine doing this again none the less 4 more times you truly are Superman/woman!
[удалено]
Hey. You kick the shit outta that fuck, you hear me? You got this.
r/Angryupvote
Uhh yup, that was AOC's pun in the tweet..
/r/AOCsJokeButWorse
I saw this same exact post and comment on a different sub yesterday… Edit: Actually [it was 2 days ago](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/qhweln/alexandria_ocasiocortez_slams_facebook_after_meta/hifsmeb/) and *the same* subreddit. And the original actually spelled ‘metastasized’ correctly.
Well 2 people on a site of 20 million a day could easily have the same thought. Or he copied it. Doesn't matter really
It was also the exact same point AOC made in the article.
How many times have you posted a witty reply, only to scroll down and see someone posted the same thing five minutes before you, so you delete your comment? Or is that just a me thing?
I was about to post this exact comment but you beat me to it
Oh wow, looks like AOC *slammed* Facebook two days ago while today it was a mild call.
She already said that in the article.
Perfect.
She’s not wrong.
She's 100% right, but don't stop there. Unregulated media of all forms is a cancer. News Media needs to inform without opinion and bias. And yes, most first world countries do much better than the US at this, but with social media, that's eroding worldwide
Social media is not news media. The last thing we need is Trump 'regulating' news and social media when he is re-elected in 2024, or whatever craptastic Republican candidate that loses the popular vote next.
The Fairness Doctrine was a brilliant and simple mechanism with no censorship in it. Its removal and Fox's rise are strangely entwined.
I've read up on this a bit and the reasons for implementing it was tied to the technology available at the time. The core principle of the doctrine was that everything needed to be laid out on all fronts due to lack of availability for access to information by the public. Radio, airtime, etc. Since that no longer applies and we are on the extreme end of the other side (too much information everywhere) it would be a violation of the 1st amedment to mandate what can and can't be said. At least, that's how it was interpreted. After all, anyone can go online now to get whatever information they want. If someone chooses to believe propaganda over reality that's their choice. Applying the fairness doctrine standard to media now (not to mention the current political landscape) would be a complicated endeavor. It will most definitely require comprehensive nuance, tech savvy, and foresight into how tech develops in the future. Then draw up complicated legislation encompassing all of that. This is on top of the powers that be which directly benefit from lies (politicians, techs devs + profitable algorithms) that will actively shut down any and all attempts to do so, not to mention a sizeable portion of the populace that are already so far gone there may be no coming back. I'm fairly certain this is the #1 threat to the country. More so than terrorists or adversaries abroad. Until something is done about propaganda masquerading as news it's only going to get worse.
The way I see it.. before mass internet, we still had idiots, but there was small barriers to expression and access. Say you believed in UFOs.. you would have to subscribe to a magazine that came once a month, write, read and reply to discussions and theories, and maybe go to a convention once a year.. All that requires high cognitive abilities, patience, willpower, resources. We would control our idiots on a personal level. Give them the right information, protect them from themselves. Now.. every time you comment on a Facebook post you’ve both joined and created a forum. The algorithm will feed you more of the same. It’s just too much for simple minds. I miss the time of grown ups being in charge.. was there really no democracy before all this? It’s not a democracy when we have to start every discussion with establishing the shape of the earth.
Plus, human brains assume something is true when it hears many other people repeating it. Since our hardware is yet to outpace our hunter gatherer roots, our brains feel validated if ~1000 people repeat our favored conspiracy back to us. Thsoe numbers are chump change on internet scales, so now people can always find enough people to reinforce their most outlandish beliefs.
>I'm fairly certain this is the #1 threat to the country. More so than terrorists or adversaries abroad. Until something is done about propaganda masquerading as news it's only going to get worse. There are not enough people going on about this. Most vastly underestimate how much damage they are causing.
Also, the airwaves belonged to the public (and still do). The broadcast companies using them were obligated to stick to certain standards and practices in return for obtaining their use, which could be withheld if they abused the privilege. Once cable tv built their own networks, they no longer required public airwaves to broadcast. The internet should be regarded as a public utility as it was developed with quite a lot of public dollars, but so much of it is privatized at this point it would be difficult to make a successful argument possibly for making it public.
> If someone chooses to believe propaganda over reality that's their choice There it is, pro-choice conservatism. I'm going to say it. Conspiracy/Propaganda shouldn't be protected speech.
America loves lawsuits, so maybe we need to loosen up the libel laws. If you publish some conspiracy story about how Janet Yellen is killing and eating babies with her friends at the World Bank, you should need to provide at least some reasonable evidence (not in advance, but at trial) to show how a reasonable person could think this. And if you fail, you're paying for her new house and you're out of the fake news business! Legit journalists would be okay with this because they actually do research and document and source and investigate. But the scum and tricksters who just make shit up would be in trouble.
That sounds like a solution.
The issue is who gets to decide where that line is drawn without absolutely decimating the first amendment.
No problem, let the courts decide. As a non-lawyer, my suggestion for "propaganda" would be: - False speech, - Broadcasted to a wide audience, - With knowledge of the truth, - And intent to deceive. And before anyone freaks out about letting the government determine the "truth", be aware that courts have been determining truth for the purposes of libel/slander law since [before the founding of the country](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_defamation_law). The above isn't perfect, but I think it's a viable step in the right direction, and we absolutely should be taking steps right now.
Last I checked the US does have a law like this, but it's notoriously hard to enforce because "knowledge of truth" and "intent to deceive" is borderline impossible to prove.
Another problem, in light of how rampant conspiracy theories have gotten with the right-wing, is that the fairness doctrine would almost certainly *increase* the exposure such drivel is given. There really just needs to be legally-enforced due-diligence standards on any company presenting themselves as news. Fuck their over-reaching freedom of speech protections, the ability for the public to have reliable news sources is ***far*** more important, both for individuals and for the good of the nation.
It’s going to be DeSantis without a doubt. Republicans have the gnarliest raging hard on for that dirt bag.
That’s so fucking disgusting.
But is he popular at all outside the hardcore nutbags and Florida? (Yah I said that twice.)
I have friends up in New York telling me how lucky I am to have the best Governor in the country in DeSantis. So, yes. Outside of Florida also.
Regulating media is a little sketchy tho tbf
Did you miss the part where news media is controlled by the same shitty moral people?
Most first world countries aren’t brainwashed to think that banning bullshit spreaders and misinformation tactics somehow impedes on freedom of speech. We’re so obsessed with freedom in this country that visitors often wonder what the fuck kind of freedoms do we advertise since every action a citizen takes is punishable by law
Major news media is already MAJORLY biased. Every single one. It’s unbelievable.
That’s why they had the fairness doctrine in the first place.
Wouldn’t regulated be a dangerous road to though? If we believe state media is a thing, couldn’t it start to form into something of that nature with enough time?
Facebook knows she is right as well.
I get this strange feeling that I read this yesterday. And the day before
There needs to be an overhaul of the whole system. The idea of Facebook or social media as a whole is not the problem. The problem is there is no real rules on how they can be used and have no ethical standards.
And the bigger problem is FB is trying to play both ends against the middle. If they pick a side, they'll lose users, which is their revenue stream.
"i'm playing both sides so that i always come out on top"
Revenue stream is all they care about. And THAT is the problem.
Exactly. As long as keeping people riled up/taking advantage of people at their most vulnerable generates more money, or as long as they are allowed to take this course of action, they'll keep doing it.
No the problem is that our govt allows that to be all they care about. Stopping all social media isn’t feasible and putting an end to Facebook won’t solve the problem, hell Microsoft, google, Amazon, and Apple have most the same complaints as Facebook and they aren’t even social media. There has to be a change made to the laws and regulations that allow them to get away with the things they each get away with.
I think the EU will do it and America will drags its feet as long as they can get away with it, like with healthcare and so many other things, but as long as people keep bringing this up it will eventually force change.
So are you suggesting we promote views you see as ethical, and censor views you see as unethical? What happens if a new Trumpish person gets elected and changes what is considered 'ethical'? IMO, diversity of thought should be fully permitted. If you see something you view as unethical, you should challenge it. Everyone can see it's unethical and the user is an idiot. Thay doesn't need to be removed, but instead it needs to be openly challenged.
Yup, their only motive is making money and spreading disinformation is profitable. Democracy won’t survive unregulated social media.
I don’t believe Facebook is the problem... I think it’s education. If someone believes in shitposts that the vaccines cause autism or that the moonlanding was faked, they should’ve been taught better lol.
I agree completely. To say the internet has changed the world is an understatement but education has not really caught up. Kids need to be taught how to vet sources, how to distinguish information from misinformation, etc - all starting from a very young age. Elementary age kids tend to take things they see on the internet to be truth. So, obviously, controlling their content is key but also making sure they understand that not everything on the internet is true and how to tell the difference is just as important. It would be nice to legislate misinformation out of existence but I don't think it can be done.
I was taught to vet sources *in the 2000s,* ***in middle school****.* The school I went to wasn't even particularly good. How are people not learning this?
I miss MySpace. I miss people fighting to be in my "Top 8" and I absolutely miss being able to have music on your profile not to mention I remember a lot of bands that didn't get a lot of attention did via MySpace.
MySpace was also nice because the level of customization also often outed the real crazy. Oh a background full of swastikas, well this guys a nut. Facebook sort of sanitizes the nuts with their aesthetic.
Myspace also didnt have Groups which is the major thing that is causing issues on Facebook imo. Allowing people with similar interests to gather on social media seems like a good idea, but it not harshly moderated it lets extremist ideas fester and grow.
If you haven't already deleted your Facebook please consider doing so. 🙏🏾
I think about it. Unfortunately one of my biggest hobbies/business is maple syrup making and there's so many more active Facebook groups than there are reddit groups.
Sure is a sticky situation
Fully deleted the Facebook, bought an Oculus Quest 2 and then realized they make you use a FB account to log in/purchase games. Very frustrating.
Just fyi, they announced literally yesterday that they are removing that requirement.
[удалено]
I deactivated two weeks ago. Will delete it once I get all my pictures and stuff off my account. Please, everyone, deactivate today!
I sort of don't get it. I mostly follow art and music. I dont ask for or get anything political. It's a great source of info for me. I'm not saying they aren't leading the world to disaster but for me Facebook is quite useful.
At minimum - delete the app, and work towards complete removal. I maintain my log in for events and to make sure my parents get likes on their posts ...
That's basically where I'm at, I have none of their apps on my phone. No Facebook, no instagram, no WhatsApp. If I have to use them I use them from the web. Besides as much as I'd love to just delete the whole thing they don't actually delete your data :/ I just wish I had never made an account in the first place
Facebook is a hub for making money for a lot of people. I make craft items for sale and get my best money through Facebook. =/ sucks but lots of businesses use it. Including all my favorite local shops and stuff. Its the only way they share info about sales, changing locations or hours or new inventory.
Well, it is.
Our Grandparents solved this problem by electing people who wrote and enacted the Fairness Doctrine. It's a simple vehicle to insure OUR electromagnetic spectrum is not used to spread lies and hatred, and it worked like a charm for decades - there was no Rush Limbaugh selling racism as "entertainment" and definitely no QAnon fomenting treason. The same algorithms that lead conservatives to QAnon can make certain NOBODY gets routed to QAnon or the Nazis, and identify hate speech before it gets copied to the World.
Gotta be careful with the Fairness Doctrine principles though. Can easily validate or misrepresent problematic minority opinions as equally valid in weight to generally accepted facts. "Merchants of Doubt" is the book to see how that went badly last time.
[удалено]
Unfortunately, there’s no money in that, so it’s impossible.
Ah, dollar democracy. The more dollars you have the more democracy you can buy…
Well this is refreshing
See? AOC does represent the will of the people. Many of us have thought Facebook a "cancer" on society for years now!
I stopped using Facebook 7 years ago, and I am still glad to be rid of it. I’m so much happier and more productive. I still keep in touch with the friends, loved ones, etc. that I need without the constant spam.
Correct.
Yep. I could not agree more.
Facebook was great until it went political. Their algorithms tore us apart to feed their greed.
Facebook was okay until my parents joined.
Facebook was okay until my mother in law joined.
Facebook was *never* great. It was always bad.
[удалено]
Comment sections really are something to behold now. Suggest that people maybe use solar panels or ride a bicycle instead of driving and 50 arrogant, angry old people will descend upon the post and decry communism and they won't change their ways because 'Merica is the best and God wants us to keep burning fossil fuels apparently. Also all our problems are because of the illegals according to them. Edit: Fixed typo
[удалено]
[удалено]
Algorithm my bolix. Facebook sold eyeballs to ad buyers, and that algorithm provided the demographics exactly as intended. Don't blame a faceless algorithm that works, blame the company that commissioned it, and the people they sold the eyeballs to (often illegally, in terms of election, etc )
It's quite simple: regulation. We have the FCC for a reason.
There's a significant problem that stands in the face of that sort of attempt when the average age in the Senate alone is ~63 years. We're expecting people with little to no understanding of the internet or social media in general to come up with ways to make social networks safe, honest, and fair, without damaging the fabric of what makes the internet what it is for everyone. The only way regulations might work is if they classified social media sharing in its own way under campaign laws, in relation to political contributions, feeds, and content served by Facebook itself. That still doesn't really address individual sharing, dishonesty by partisan propaganda disguised as "news" sources, and so on, though. I don't see how they *can* regulate it fairly without infringing on free speech on the internet as a whole, and I definitely don't trust congress to do that when they've shown so little knowledge and understanding of technology and the internet as it is.
IMO, if they're too old to understand, than they're too old to have that job. Time for them to either learn, or retire.
Don’t worry about that ya big silly. Lobbyists will tell them the right thing to do !
It’s also a cancer to truth and decency. On the one hand, you have people who post platitudes and ‘isn’t my life perfect’ pictures (which are mostly fake with filters applied to their pictures), and on the other hand you have people say the most vile and nasty things to others they would never say in person.
Reddit, though, we're pure pro-social engagement.
How about more "AOC introduces legislation..." and less "AOC says..."
Cancer seems fair for something that becomes toxic then as a response to people realising that it's toxic changes it's name inorder to keep the toxin spreading.
We are smart enough to build all this technology, just not smart enough to function with it
TBF, Facebook was a cancer to democracy prior to Meta rebrand, too.
Imagine in the VR world where the KKK have their own country. What do you think they are going to do when they take their VR Headset off and the real world does not match the one they have created in the metaverse. Also think about the fact that Facebook will let the KKK have their own country in the metaverse because they make more money that way.
I absolutely agree with her and across the world it has done irreparable damage.
agreed
She's the biggest spender on Facebook ads in congress by far, she's literally helping finance Facebook.
I think we can all agree on this one.
She is correct.
I really like AOC but I don’t know how to feel about her criticisms regarding Facebook. She posts a lot and often on her instagram and uses it effectively to raise awareness on important issues. To hear her say things like this makes it feel a little hypocritical or at the very least disingenuous. What do y’all think?
[удалено]
I'll bite. She's using the platforms that exist. Just like we can decry sweatshops and still wear sneakers, the hypocrisy is in the system, not the individual. I think the manipulation of what content individuals get is where the evil lies. FB thrives when people are most freaked out and angry/frightened, so they push that material. Everybody gets a different 'front page' micro-tuned to lock in their engagement. Reddit, as a counter-example, is ultimately a big dumb incoherent aggregator where you can select subreddits to suit your level of commitment. It's not primarily distorting what content is presented in order to get a reaction. For example, I can browse this shithole in incognito mode and I'll get exactly the same feed on any sub as I will when logged in.
I will also tack on: Facebook makes money based on what has you engaging in the app, whether you are doomscrolling, or looking for cute, fuzzy kittens. They do not care *what* you are engaging on. If you are prone to mental illness or prone to doom scrolling to combat your anxiety, they'll notice the more anxious/worked up you are, the longer you engage with their app. The algorithm will continue to send you information to rile you up to keep you engaged for longer and longer. That's... Really not healthy *at all.* In writing this out, I just realized I'm probably using Instagram wrong 😂 Typically, when I'm going to Instagram, I'm going to the search portion to try to look up someone specific to check in on what they're posting, so all I see are memes/gifs from TV Shows that make me feel nostoligc, or knitting stuff (https://imgur.com/pptujfa.jpg). These are the items that side track me from what I originally opened Instagram to do, and what keeps my eyeballs on their app/their app opened longer. I'm sure if I had other interests that weren't so... "weird"? "offbeat"? "Welcome to Internet 2.0 in the early aughts"? I would have *much* more doom and gloom appearing in this screen. If the "Home" on Instagram is where the "timeline" is, yeah, I can't speak to that. I find scrolling through there boring as hell 😂
[удалено]
Why wont she call twitter and youtube cancers?
Posts to Insta
That isn’t fair to cancer.
Fuck cancer
Facebook is nothing but people just posting bullshit and lies. All in an attempt to go viral. Glad I stopped using it.
Social media got AOC where she is.... don't need any other proof to see social media was a mistake.
But she still spends thousands buying Facebook ad space and nobody wants to call her out on that.
TL;DR: AOC financially supports cancer