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

Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 178 posts

Re: Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage

#131

Post by buboard »

msbarnett wrote: post #27
buboard wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

because the people advocating for tits equality are a tiny group, while mainstream politics have wide implications. I m all for tit freedom, but facebook's lawyers have to weigh in the costs of litigation

free speech is only for popular, mainstream speech? I don’t really care what’s cost effective for Facebook’s lawyers; we don’t have to care about that , so we should stop enabling the lie that their main concern is enabling free speech. Costs, playing nice with established powers, not scaring away advertisers by putting their ads too near a nipple — these are their concerns, and we should stop participating in the de…

Sure, but , i mean they are free to call it free speech, and use it as a selling point. People judge the truth of that statement by their actions

Re: Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage

#132

Post by msbarnett »

buboard wrote: post #131
msbarnett wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

free speech is only for popular, mainstream speech? I don’t really care what’s cost effective for Facebook’s lawyers; we don’t have to care about that , so we should stop enabling the lie that their main concern is enabling free speech. Costs, playing nice with established powers, not scaring away advertisers by putting their ads too near a nipple — these are their concerns, and we should stop participating in the de…

Sure, but , i mean they are free to call it free speech, and use it as a selling point. People judge the truth of that statement by their actions

> People judge the truth of that statement by their actions.

Which is what I’m doing?

I’m not clear what your issue is with me pointing out the inconsistency between their their new fluffy marketing and their actions, given what you just wrote.

Re: Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage

#134

Post by coldtea »

diego wrote: post #7

Facebook has nothing to do with free speech. Free speech is "you don't go to jail for saying something." You're not entitled to a platform for shouting out loud.

That's a provincial US-Constitutional-centric idea of "free speech".

There's more to free speech that "you don't go to jail".

In fact historically it wasn't necessarily the state that mostly got you for saying things they don't like. It was the church (a separate thing), "concerned citizen" mobs, and so on...

Losing your job, being deplatformed from platforms where the majority tunes in (and thus being relegated to fringe, not from being unpopular but for what you said), having (privately owned) shops decline to carry your work, being made a pariah, are all parts of free speech.

Some common examples of post-Spanish Inquisition cases:

Novelists like Henry Miller and Burroughs didn't have trouble just with government censorship, but also by private publishing houses that wouldn't carry their books, because "concerned citizens" would bully them if they did.

Punks in 1977 were attached, not by the state, but by right wingers and conservative citizens who didn't like their style.

Parental organizations fought whenever some album they deemed "controversial" was released, from the Sex Pistols, to Jello Biafra to Marilyn Manson (and earlier), and tried (and often managed) to have those albums deplatformed, with major chains refusing to carry their stuff because of threats...

People considered of this or that affiliation would often not be persecuted by the state (at least not directly) but be branded and lose their jobs (even though this had nothing to do with their job performance). This, back in the day, include anything from suspected communist sympathizers to black rights activists, and still does all around the world...

Re: Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage

#135

Post by privateSFacct »

gherkinnn wrote: post #23
privateSFacct wrote: post #19

There was a period where feeds were just wall to wall outrage. Literally, at trump, at obama, at random other friends on facebook. It was crazy. Reality - life's much better getting off social media and hanging out with friends in real life - and instagram has a bit less outrage machine stuff - easier / quieter place to share pix of the kids playing and catchup with what folks are up to.

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.

My own view - the lack of reposts. I think reposts based on outrage probably do better then other reposts, so on facebook you can get lots of these - they are not even your friends words or research. What's really funny is when you have friends on facebook in different sides of things. I live in a very liberal area, I used to work in a very conservative area - literally BOTH sides are constantly outraged at the other.

Most recently - left friends are saying XXX. On the right it just as heated and bitter the other way YYY. Everyone in their little bubble. (To reduce the noise I'm leaving out the topics of the day).

Re: Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage

#136

Post by skybrian »

It's odd to pretend this started with Facebook when it happens in almost every online forum. There was plenty of outrage on the early Internet. We called it a "flame war" back then.

Amplification is just a fancy word for sharing. You don't need a fancy algorithm. It can be done using forwarding and reply-all. And chain letters predate the Internet.

The software is a bit different, but the main difference is that we're more connected than back then. There are more ways to copy messages and people get notified faster.

Re: Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage

#137

Post by baby »

marcosdumay wrote: post #120
baby wrote: post #20

I think that is misdirection. There are two parts that I don't think are contradicted by this article: 1) Facebook, twitter, and other social networks give people a voice and a community. 2) If these platforms are censored in a country, it has a great effect on free speech in the country. Now, there are some good questions related to the article to ask here: a) Are these platforms actually a problem because of the am…

> Facebook, twitter, and other social networks give people a voice and a community. No, it doesn't. That the point. It gives people a some of curated information subset from what people they know is saying, probably out of context, and heavily biased. That's not a community, because it's not made of whole people. They also give voice to some of your thoughts that they decide they want to. That's not voice, or at leas…

> No, it doesn't

I'm part of several communities in both Facebook and Twitter, so I fail to see your point.

This is actually why most people use Facebook/Twitter nowadays.

Re: Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage

#138

Post by baby »

cptaj wrote: post #32
baby wrote: post #20

I think that is misdirection. There are two parts that I don't think are contradicted by this article: 1) Facebook, twitter, and other social networks give people a voice and a community. 2) If these platforms are censored in a country, it has a great effect on free speech in the country. Now, there are some good questions related to the article to ask here: a) Are these platforms actually a problem because of the am…

Isn't the algorithm a form of censorship in and of itself? It decides what to show and what to hide. Yes, you can drill down to find what you want, but that will either never happen at scale or might be entirely impractical.

That's a good and I think more interesting question. I don't have a good answer for you :)

Re: Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage

#139

Post by diego »

doubleunplussed wrote: post #82
diego wrote: post #7

Facebook has nothing to do with free speech. Free speech is "you don't go to jail for saying something." You're not entitled to a platform for shouting out loud.

This is just a slogan people keep saying, and whilst it's useful fodder for one side of the debate, I'd encourage you to question it. I'm sure you're smart enough to understand the concept of free speech outside of what is protected by the US constitution. That is what people are often talking about, and even though their legal recourse (in the US) is often limited to only preventing government censorship, we are fre…

No need for the patronizing, almost obnoxious tone. I mostly disagree with what you just said, and not for lack of questioning. Current laws or not, you’re not entitled to the attention of others, and I don’t think you should be. If you want attention, you need to earn it.

Re: Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage

#140

Post by mindgam3 »

When making up one one's mind about whether Zuck is sincere in his passionate pleas for free speech, consider that:

1) he took no questions from reporters, only pre-moderated questions from students, and

2) Facebook Live chat was scrubbed of any critical comments by algorithmic filters.

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/ma...

Post reply on HN