Pretty classic provocation and overreaction
Facebook backtracks after removing Warren ads calling for Facebook breakup
11–20 of 215 posts
Re: Facebook backtracks after removing Warren ads calling for Facebook breakup
#12> Facebook confirms it took down Elizabeth Warren's ads about Facebook, but is in the process of restoring them. > FB spox: "We removed the ads because they violated our policies against use of our corporate logo. In the interest of allowing robust debate, we are restoring the ads.” https://twitter.com/RMac18/status/1105241057007087616
The terms of service suggest that any ad that discusses Facebook is ripe for removal. Her point stands and is expanded by the selective enforcement of their ToS; is this the platform for public discourse that we want for ourselves and do we want any such platform to be this powerful?
Re: Facebook backtracks after removing Warren ads calling for Facebook breakup
#13Pretty classic provocation and overreaction
Amazon bans sales of Trump's "Break up Amazon to MAGA" hats
Re: Facebook backtracks after removing Warren ads calling for Facebook breakup
#14> Facebook confirms it took down Elizabeth Warren's ads about Facebook, but is in the process of restoring them. > FB spox: "We removed the ads because they violated our policies against use of our corporate logo. In the interest of allowing robust debate, we are restoring the ads.” https://twitter.com/RMac18/status/1105241057007087616
The terms of service suggest that any ad that discusses Facebook is ripe for removal. Her point stands and is expanded by the selective enforcement of their ToS; is this the platform for public discourse that we want for ourselves and do we want any such platform to be this powerful?
I thought Warren’s demographic loves having top down moderation-heavy social networks?
Re: Facebook backtracks after removing Warren ads calling for Facebook breakup
#15While she views Facebook as too powerful, it is ironic she is happy to provide as revenue to the company.
It's not ironic, this is the entire point she is trying to make. It is impossible to reach a meaningful chunk of the public today without going through Facebook, and they have the ability to filter content as they see fit.
> It is impossible to reach a meaningful chunk of the public today without going through Facebook
One could argue that the point of advertising is not to reach a meaningful chunk of the public, instead a meaningful chunk of a specific demographic.
Re: Facebook backtracks after removing Warren ads calling for Facebook breakup
#16Just curious, how many out there use some type of Facebook ad-blocking solution?
My Facbook ad-blocking solution has been to:
1 - quit Facebook
2 - use /etc/hosts to resolve any Facebook-related sites (and other advertising/spam/tracking/malware sites) to 255.255.255.255
3 - proxy my web requests through privoxy
4 - use the uMatrix and uBlock Origin addons in Firefox that block anything that gets through the rest
But I mostly browse the web through emacs-w3m, which isn't even capable of running javascript so addons such as uMatrix are not necessary.
Needless to say, I almost never see ads.
Re: Facebook backtracks after removing Warren ads calling for Facebook breakup
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
The terms of service suggest that any ad that discusses Facebook is ripe for removal. Her point stands and is expanded by the selective enforcement of their ToS; is this the platform for public discourse that we want for ourselves and do we want any such platform to be this powerful?
I thought Warren’s demographic loves having top down moderation-heavy social networks?
Is what you think of Elizabeth Warren informed by what Elizabeth Warren says and does?
Re: Facebook backtracks after removing Warren ads calling for Facebook breakup
#18Just curious, how many out there use some type of Facebook ad-blocking solution?
Can’t find canonical sources right now, but the percentage of users of Facebook on mobile is 90%+. Of that, most of them would be using the official app, where traditional ad blockers wouldn’t work.
But ad blocking is enough of a money problem for Facebook that it keeps attempting to beat them through many tricks (spelling words with invisible characters, putting words split into characters and each one in a , etc., to beat pattern matching).
The rare times when I use Facebook, I always login through a browser with an ad blocker (and tracker blockers) on.
Re: Facebook backtracks after removing Warren ads calling for Facebook breakup
#19Serious question(s), not trolling.
Why shouldn't Facebook take down the ad that's calling for a break up of their Company?
How is this any different from a person walking into a store and asking to place an ad inside the store calling for breakup or shutting down of said store? What store owner would ever allow such a thing?
Why would (or should) any business allow any sort of propaganda that strikes at the heart of it's operations?
Why would Facebook be expected to restore the ads (which I don't think they should've done).
Re: Facebook backtracks after removing Warren ads calling for Facebook breakup
#20While she views Facebook as too powerful, it is ironic she is happy to provide as revenue to the company.
It's not ironic, this is the entire point she is trying to make. It is impossible to reach a meaningful chunk of the public today without going through Facebook, and they have the ability to filter content as they see fit.
So is that really going to change if Facebook is broken up?
More importantly, is it going to make for a better web, or is it just going to wind up strengthening the online tracking and advertising industries in the long run?
My own proposal would be to ban tracking and unsolicited advertising altogether -- no matter who does it.