Journalism isn't free speech, it's manufacturing consent.
Por qué no los dos?
Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage
91–100 of 178 posts
Re: Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage
#92filed under: no shit!!
how does anyone think this is journalism. all you need is a pulse and an IQ above freezing temp to know that FB is a cesspool.
Re: Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage
#93Any form of media that earns its profit from viewership and selling advertising, including broadcast and cable news and news radio, is optimized for outrage. That's what attracts the eyeballs. The "algorithmic" part is irrelevant.
Sex attracts eyeballs too though it's a bit more difficult to sell Kraft Cheese Singles using sex.
I think they're just called 'Kraft Singles' - they aren't cheese, even by American definitions!
Re: Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage
#94Any form of media that earns its profit from viewership and selling advertising, including broadcast and cable news and news radio, is optimized for outrage. That's what attracts the eyeballs. The "algorithmic" part is irrelevant.
Sex attracts eyeballs too though it's a bit more difficult to sell Kraft Cheese Singles using sex.
I'm having flashbacks to my honeymoon.
Re: Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage
#95Feels relevant: https://slatestarcodex.com/2018/10/30/sort-by-controversial/
Basically OP, but amped up and told kind of like a ghost story.
Re: Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage
#96Any form of media that earns its profit from viewership and selling advertising, including broadcast and cable news and news radio, is optimized for outrage. That's what attracts the eyeballs. The "algorithmic" part is irrelevant.
Sex attracts eyeballs too though it's a bit more difficult to sell Kraft Cheese Singles using sex.
Engagement is more important than eyeballs, since the more engagements you have, the more eyeballs you'll reach.
Re: Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage
#97I assume this author prefers techcrunch's megaphone to facebook's because TC has an editorial tone and picks their experts. But wading through a crowd to get your information is the new normal. The era of edited information is over. There are pros and cons but this genie isn't going back in its bottle.
Re: Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage
#98An important questions to ask is: for each visible element on the page, whose speech is it? The stuff inside the boxes is the speech of the users. Everything outside, including the order and choice of the posts, is Facebook's speech.
This is even more obvious with YouTube. The choice of who they recommend is Google's. Which means it's reasonable to ask them why they're recommending fascist and antivax propaganda.
Re: Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the abstract, no. But we already know that Facebook excludes free speech: simply attempt to post a photograph containing bare female breasts on Facebook or a Facebook-owned property like Instagram, and it will swiftly be removed for violating “community guidelines”. So Facebook themselves have clearly excluded themselves from the former.
Free speech itself as a legal concept comes with limitations based on community guidelines, including obscenity and pornography. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech#Limitation... I don’t believe there is any country in the world today for which “free speech” means that anything that can be said is legal and protected, but many people seem to think otherwise based on the name.
I was always under the impression free speech advocacy is the spirit of unlimited speech and not the literal word of law in speech. For example, I recall lots of controversy that is the deplatforming of various alt-right advocates and speakers (Sargon of Akkad for example, or 8chan, or the banning of various subreddits). And while it is literally legal for a private entity to no longer want to service parties it doesn’t find tasteful, the actual act of doing it I’ve seen violates the ‘spirit’ of free speech. I believe that phenomenon is the one being referenced.
Re: Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
Regarding Insta, it’s interesting how some platforms are inherently more peaceful. The lack of links? Tiny, almost irrelevant image descriptions? Barely a commenting system to speak of? Just vanity and pretty people. It’s quite nice. And makes for a good case study.
A vanity place with pretty people pushing random products in their feeds. How is that "nice"?
Not quite as poisonous as other places. And some people actually post nice stuff.
It’s what you make of it and harder to go to shit.