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

Facebook backtracks after removing Warren ads calling for Facebook breakup

politico.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 215 posts

Re: Facebook backtracks after removing Warren ads calling for Facebook breakup

#141

Post by mirimir »

dymk wrote: post #117
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Dissecting the company along those lines does nothing to curb their cumulative potential effect on controlling what ads a user sees If I can reach my audience through Facebook or Instagram, that’s more competition than Facebook properties alone. > They all hook into the same ad backend anyways Hence the call to break them up.

How in the world is that enforceable, or legal?

Well, there was the Bell System. But arguably that didn't work as planned. And it probably couldn't happen today.

But regulation as a public utility might work.

Re: Facebook backtracks after removing Warren ads calling for Facebook breakup

#142

Post by didibus »

I think I'd rather see it regulated, then broken up.

How are you even going to break it up?

And how do we know it won't just be a matter of time before another single, central social network takes hold?

Social Networks have this property where they are only useful when other people are also on the same one as you. To me, this property will just guarantee that we would end up back in the same situation.

So it would seem smarter to me to just regulate it, so we can limit the bad, and enjoy the good.

Re: Facebook backtracks after removing Warren ads calling for Facebook breakup

#143

Post by as300 »

wvenable wrote: post #79
as300 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their monopoly is on discourse and dissemination of information. I'm going to sound a bit paternalistic and anti-capitalist here, because I am. Facebook is no longer just a company, it's an institution that should definitely be regulated. It enables the rapid dissemination of societally-impactful information that may or may not be true. There was plenty of fake information on facebook around the 2016 election that in…

They own the majority means of discourse and dissemination of information? Newpapers? Television networks? Come on. That's not even close to true.

What percentage of the population can write for a newspaper or appear on TV?

When I say dissemination, I'm not just talking about elites. If the average Joe wanted to reach out asany people as they know and tell them something, tell me how they should do it?

Re: Facebook backtracks after removing Warren ads calling for Facebook breakup

#144

Post by wvenable »

as300 wrote: post #143
wvenable wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They own the majority means of discourse and dissemination of information? Newpapers? Television networks? Come on. That's not even close to true.

What percentage of the population can write for a newspaper or appear on TV? When I say dissemination, I'm not just talking about elites. If the average Joe wanted to reach out asany people as they know and tell them something, tell me how they should do it?

You're doing a fine job right here. But Twitter seems to be a far better option than Facebook for that kind of scenario.

Re: Facebook backtracks after removing Warren ads calling for Facebook breakup

#146

Post by as300 »

as300 wrote: post #143
wvenable wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They own the majority means of discourse and dissemination of information? Newpapers? Television networks? Come on. That's not even close to true.

What percentage of the population can write for a newspaper or appear on TV? When I say dissemination, I'm not just talking about elites. If the average Joe wanted to reach out asany people as they know and tell them something, tell me how they should do it?

And before someone comes and says that I want to police free speech, no. Not at all. I simply want curation which means a set of processes that are followed for certain categories of speech, and the labeling of potential speech as incorrect or untrue. I don't want to lock anybody up for posting fake news (though wouldn't mind if they were banned)

Re: Facebook backtracks after removing Warren ads calling for Facebook breakup

#147

Post by as300 »

wvenable wrote: post #144
as300 wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What percentage of the population can write for a newspaper or appear on TV? When I say dissemination, I'm not just talking about elites. If the average Joe wanted to reach out asany people as they know and tell them something, tell me how they should do it?

You're doing a fine job right here. But Twitter seems to be a far better option than Facebook for that kind of scenario.

Fair point, looking at Facebook as a platform and product I think it has far greater impact than Twitter.

Re: Facebook backtracks after removing Warren ads calling for Facebook breakup

#149

Post by pard68 »

dgudkov wrote: post #120
rorykoehler wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just read the App Annie 2019 app report this morning, and the 3 most used apps in Singapore in 2018 were Whatsapp, Instagram and Facebook. Though I didn't check for US stats I'm sure they are similar. That is effectively a monopoly.

>That is effectively a monopoly. Monopoly on what exactly?

Eyeballs

Re: Facebook backtracks after removing Warren ads calling for Facebook breakup

#150

Post by edmundsauto »

Swenrekcah wrote: post #112
chrisseaton wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> or a bar evicting someone who politely disagreed with the owner Is this supposed to be an example of something unreasonable? Of course a publican can ask anyone to leave their bar for any reason or not reason at all, as long as it's not because of a protected characteristic. I think that's extremely reasonable.

True, but all of these small-business/relatable analogies break down because fb is a monopoly. It would be unreasonable if a polite disagreement with one person excluded you from 90% of bars in your state/country.

It's more like getting kicked out of the most popular bar, where 90% of your friends go. Sure, there are other bars, but you want to go to the one with your friends.
Post reply on HN