Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook’s Walled Wonderland Is Inherently Incompatible with News

mondaynote.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 244 posts

Re: Facebook’s Walled Wonderland Is Inherently Incompatible with News

#61

Post by tmptmp »

I am not a fan of FB but it must be understood that FB is not a news agency.

Another thing to consider here is: FB may be wallgardened, but what about the mainstream news organizations that are sold out to various parties? (e.g. Saudi Islamists have many huge investments/shares in many mainstream news organizations)

Many mainstream news organizations are worse than FB when it comes to spread lies and propaganda in the name of news. We can already feel the influence of Saudi money in the US mainstream media. The mainstream US media is suppressing any criticism of Islam under the flimsy arguments like racism and islamophobia. This is already creating a suffocating atmosphere for true liberals.

A factor to note here is even though the mainstream news organizations claim that they are liberal and left-leaning, they act like barbaric people when it comes to Islam. I do not see any criticism of Islam (e.g. horrendous treatment of women, homosexuals in Islam) in the mainstream media. Not even the discussion of problematic aspects of Islamic scriptures has any place in the mainstream media.

Why should a common man trust the mainstream media news media?

Then you see that it's the social media (FB, whatsapp, twitter, reddit etc) that gives the people what they think is needed to be reported/argued/discussed.

e.g. FB (along with many other social media sites) has helped lot of people to learn the dangers posed by Islamism.

How and why someone as lowly as Trump got elected? This may be very complex topic to analyze as there are many contributing factors but one factor played very important role in his win is the "outright dishonest approach by mainstream news media towards the issue of dangers posed by Islam".

Sam Harris has put it quite aptly: Liberals failure to talk honestly about Islam is responsible for the rise of Trump [1]

I have learnt over the years to not trust many of the pseudo-liberal news organizations like NY times, Guardian etc. e.g. When Charlie Hebdo people were killed by the Islamists, most of these left-leaning pseudo-liberal news agencies were/are very much partial and acted like outright sold-out to Islamists (Saudi funders) when it comes to deal with news related to the vicious and barbaric aspects of Islam and various Islamic cultures.

We must also understand that it's finally the reader's responsibility to filter all news, whether it's from FB or from other established news agencies/organizations.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YCWf0tHy7M

Re: Facebook’s Walled Wonderland Is Inherently Incompatible with News

#62

Post by aaronbrethorst »

andrewvijay wrote: post #25
grzm wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if it's not for profit, it will still need income. Where will that income come from?

I simply dont know answers to all these questions!! And quite frankly their top executives have to be worried about that. Not us.

No, we all need to worry because the outcome affects all of us, whether or not we use Facebook.

Re: Facebook’s Walled Wonderland Is Inherently Incompatible with News

#63

Post by aaronbrethorst »

cmurf wrote: post #20
mozumder wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just Facebook, but also Twitter and Reddit. The Republican guy that shot the pizza place in DC today was driven by a conspiracy theory marketed on Reddit. These social-media sites are literally dangerous.

Hardly any different than fanatic religions. Even the KKK gets freedom of speech and assembly. I think the problem with digital walled gardens is when the filter totally prevents critical thinking and sometimes even the ensuing cognitive dissonance. Most will resolve the dissonance via withdrawal, not changing their minds. But even withdrawal is better than escalation. If the walled garden makes it easy for people to…

> Even the KKK gets freedom of speech and assembly.

Yes, but their freedoms stop well before lynching people.

Re: Facebook’s Walled Wonderland Is Inherently Incompatible with News

#64

Post by zeroer »

welanes wrote: post #50
andrewvijay wrote: post #6

> We are not in the business of picking which issues the world should read about. We are in the business of connecting people and ideas — and matching people with the stories they find most meaningful. Our integrity depends on being inclusive of all perspectives and view points, and using ranking to connect people with the stories and sources they find the most meaningful and engaging. Simply incredible. They are ass…

> They are asserting themselves only as a business and not emotional influencers...The emotional influences that facebook brings in people is very powerful. The same could be said of TV networks, Spotify, Twitter, Google photos. We are the catalyst that turn stories, music, photos into emotional reactions. We control the dials. Facebook makes it incredibly easy to step outside our bubbles. Click the Like button on a…

> If I was to contract scurvy because it keeps recommending donuts instead of orange juice who is ultimately responsible?

You? Your doctors? Jesus. What kind of world devoid of personal responsibility do you live in?

Re: Facebook’s Walled Wonderland Is Inherently Incompatible with News

#65

Post by zdkl »

grzm wrote: post #19
zdkl wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the bigger question as far as I've come to think of it: is a for profit company compatible with the role facebook is filling?

And if it's not for profit, it will still need income. Where will that income come from?

Again, I was arguing that the company doesn't need to exist. They showed the public a new use of information technologies and executed their expansion admirably. However, since saturation of the initial (rich/western) target population they have been steadily removing value from the platform that got people excited.

Why should they be assured of revenue if their business is bait and switch?

[edit: typing is hard]

Re: Facebook’s Walled Wonderland Is Inherently Incompatible with News

#66

Post by elgenie »

zeroer wrote: post #64
welanes wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They are asserting themselves only as a business and not emotional influencers...The emotional influences that facebook brings in people is very powerful. The same could be said of TV networks, Spotify, Twitter, Google photos. We are the catalyst that turn stories, music, photos into emotional reactions. We control the dials. Facebook makes it incredibly easy to step outside our bubbles. Click the Like button on a…

> If I was to contract scurvy because it keeps recommending donuts instead of orange juice who is ultimately responsible? You? Your doctors? Jesus. What kind of world devoid of personal responsibility do you live in?

Congratulations, you have successfully answered a rhetorical question in the way that its author intended, thereby making the intended point. Well done.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetorical_question

Re: Facebook’s Walled Wonderland Is Inherently Incompatible with News

#67

Post by briandear »

mozumder wrote: post #8
andrewvijay wrote: post #6

> We are not in the business of picking which issues the world should read about. We are in the business of connecting people and ideas — and matching people with the stories they find most meaningful. Our integrity depends on being inclusive of all perspectives and view points, and using ranking to connect people with the stories and sources they find the most meaningful and engaging. Simply incredible. They are ass…

It's not just Facebook, but also Twitter and Reddit. The Republican guy that shot the pizza place in DC today was driven by a conspiracy theory marketed on Reddit. These social-media sites are literally dangerous.

Any proof it was a "Republican?"

The WaPo story made no mention of political party.

Do we say "Democrat guy" when referring to the Orlando shooter? He actually was a Democrat. James Holmes who shot up the Colorado movie theater -- also a registered Democrat and even volunteered for the Obama campaign. Andrew Stack who flew his plane into the Austin IRS building -- was a supporter of communism. John Patrick Bedell who shot police officers outside the Pentagon in 2008 -- registered Democrat and subscriber to the 9-11 "Truth" conspiracy, not to mention an extreme hater of Bush/Cheney.

My point is that assuming facts not in evidence is exactly the problem. Now everyone who tends to agree with anti-Republican sentiment has their view reinforced by your own fake news. It works both ways. Fake news isn't a 'Republican' thing any more than it's a 'Democrat' thing. Plenty of fake stories circulate in places like Marin County about the 'vaccine conspiracies' or how this political or that has secret deals with "big oil" or whomever.

Promoting an unproven narrative of a "Republican" shooter IS fake news unless there is actual evidence otherwise.

Re: Facebook’s Walled Wonderland Is Inherently Incompatible with News

#68

Post by rgbrgb »

fleitz wrote: post #39
zoul wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody is forced to use Facebook, but the fact is that for a vast number of people it represents the main source of news. Which, if this source can be easily gamed, is a problem. Since how do you “convince others that they are being misled” if the “alternative” media, plenty represented in their news feeds, discredit the traditional, trustworthy media first? There is a great Guardian Long Read about this very topic:…

Isn't it up to the viewer not the publisher to decide what is trustworthy? Perhaps when major media get so many real stories about democracy wrong and the alt media get them right it's time to stop trusting the people getting things wrong and start trusting the people getting things right. Fuck, even the NYT had to recommit itself to journalism their reporting this year was so bad. 'As we reflect on the momentous res…

> Isn't it up to the viewer not the publisher to decide what is trustworthy?

If we want to have healthy democracy, it's up to all of us to figure out how to get every citizen to consume factual information and let them know when they're being lied to. That's a Hard Problem with an incredibly valuable solution. To me it seems like FB is well positioned to play a role here. They've figured out how to get a huge population to consume content on their platform - now they need to figure out how to get people to consume some knowledge along with the cat pictures and avoid outright lies (e.g. dead FBI director [0]). The question is whether that would be counter to their engagement KPIs (maybe some people only want "facts" they agree with). My gut says that eliminating the clickbait/propaganda (internet noise) would make it all the more indispensable as a resource/utility.

[0]: http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2016/12/02/504155809/episo...

Re: Facebook’s Walled Wonderland Is Inherently Incompatible with News

#69

Post by Ygg2 »

ivanhoe wrote: post #42

How is this different from news sites? They also earn the most of money from advertisers and the main criteria for those advertisers are page views. We still completely lack a viable internet business model that would strongly encourage the quality and not quantity...

I suspect it's untenable, really.

You either enforce differing viewpoint and run the risk of: A) censoring news B) disapointing viewers C) give legitimacy to possibly damaging world views

Don't censor and allow fake news and filter bubble.

Re: Facebook’s Walled Wonderland Is Inherently Incompatible with News

#70

Post by saint_fiasco »

andrewvijay wrote: post #34
grzm wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook's motto should be changed from 'connecting people' to 'connecting people to show only what they like'. Is this what you think Facebook should be? Or what you think is a more accurate description of what Facebook is? What would this look like in concrete steps? How do you manage bullying? Knowingly spreading misinformation and disinformation? What prevents Facebook from becoming one big flamewar? How do you d…

>Is this what you think Facebook should be? It was a metaphor. >What would this look like in concrete steps? Taking social responsibility. I dont know the steps because I dont run that business only affected by it. >How do you manage bullying? >Knowingly spreading misinformation and disinformation? >What prevents Facebook from becoming one big flamewar? FB should be deciding on these. They can if they want to. >How d…

Nobody is asking you to take the steps, just describe them.

What steps would you take if you had all the resources at Facebook's disposal and it was your responsibility. Yes, I know it's not really your responsibility but it's all hypothetical.

Post reply on HN