Zuckerberg doubles down on Facebook political ads policy after Twitter ban • Hacker News Board

Re: Zuckerberg doubles down on Facebook political ads policy after Twitter ban

#51

Post by jandrese » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 2:13 PM UTC

gorgoiler wrote: post #26

mc32 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So should be only left with live face to face stump speeches?

It is possible for the state to ensure that political parties get media airtime without having to buy ads. Canada, Ireland, and the UK all do this with Party Political Broadcasts : https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_political_broadcast

But these are limited to political parties. You are proposing to take away the voice of SuperPACs who make the lion's share of the paid advertisement in a modern campaign. If billionaires don't get a voice how can they control the government? You are going to make them go back to regular lobbying and regulatory capture! What a travesty!

Re: Zuckerberg doubles down on Facebook political ads policy after Twitter ban

#52

Post by _jal » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 2:13 PM UTC

sjwright wrote: post #42

Lazare wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I notice you don't address his actual point though. If, let's say, a group advocating for the abolishment of asset forfeiture wants to communicate their message, and the media is not covering it, it would be natural for them to try paying for ads, and the obvious place to put ads are on social media, since that's where the eyeballs are (cf, the collapse of the news media). If social media bans those ads then while th…

Claiming that we must be reliant on private corporations for free speech is a corruption of the very concept. I don't agree with your argument, but to the extent that there's any truth to it the remedy can only be to fix the underlying problem—not submitting to it. To be clear, my objection isn't to all online advertising but specifically to Zuckerberg defending Facebook's policy with an appeal to free speech. Obviou…

Well, I'm sympathetic to where you're coming from, but this is muddled.

"Freedom of the press belongs to those who own one" has been a cliche for a long, long time, and while it is a little flip, there's a truth there. Your freedom of speech does not require me or anyone else to amplify it. Or even listen.

Put another way, do you believe you should be forced to tell other people my message? What about everyone else's?

Re: Zuckerberg doubles down on Facebook political ads policy after Twitter ban

#53

Post by nkkollaw » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 2:14 PM UTC

sp332 wrote: post #39

On Twitter it's at least possible for candidates or organizations to have a huge reach without paying money. On Facebook, they limit your reach so that even people who explicitly follow your page don't see your updates in their timeline unless you pay up.

There are always bots...

Re: Zuckerberg doubles down on Facebook political ads policy after Twitter ban

#54

Post by samatman » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 2:14 PM UTC

thosakwe wrote: post #47

samatman wrote: post #6

Facebook, the platform, is in trouble. It doesn't matter what the outcome is of the 2020 election season, or what Facebook does during it. They will be blamed for it. Buying Instagram and Whatsapp was farsighted, Facebook the company can cruise for awhile on those properties. The main site is bound to fall out of fashion, and soon. Can't be soon enough for my taste.

As far I can tell, this is only really the attitude in the Western world. Most of my relatives live in Nigeria, and all of them use Facebook a lot. And at that, there are still many people in the US who mainly use Facebook, especially Gen X and older, so I always question if there are as many people on this train as it often seems like.

I don't think Facebook would be happy to lose all their high-value customers and keep the ones in markets where they don't make as much money.

As for "Gen X and older", when your youngest customers are pushing 40, that's the kiss of death.

I agree with all sibling comments that claim that Facebook is already out of fashion; I'm suggesting that this will get worse, rapidly.

Suggesting? Ok, hoping.

Re: Zuckerberg doubles down on Facebook political ads policy after Twitter ban

#55

Post by SiempreViernes » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 2:14 PM UTC

SolaceQuantum wrote: post #22

I'm mostly confused as to what sorts of free speech is being violated by not using ads? Parties can post on their facebook pages and comment the same way users can. Isn't that equal speech? What's the dimension I'm missing?

Free speech is the tech industry's default excuse for not enforcing something, and for about two decades it worked fine. Please have to have some forbearance while they get over their addiction to that particular excuse.

Re: Zuckerberg doubles down on Facebook political ads policy after Twitter ban

#56

Post by ataluttasgiran » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 2:15 PM UTC

Political ads are not a problem. Targeted political ads are the real problem. I think all targeted ads are the real problem.

Re: Zuckerberg doubles down on Facebook political ads policy after Twitter ban

#57

Post by psds2 » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 2:15 PM UTC

Someone just needs to start a dark money PAC promoting the NAMBLA agenda, surely they have a candidate in a race somewhere. Fill Facebook with these ads.

Re: Zuckerberg doubles down on Facebook political ads policy after Twitter ban

#58

Post by joejerryronnie » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 2:15 PM UTC

wan23 wrote: post #24

Derek_MK wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither really, it's demonstrating that it's kind of dumb to consider a paid advertisement "speech" for the purposes of "free speech", considering there's inherently a restriction there on how much "speech" you get, because you have to pay for the ability to "speak".

Free speech isn't free in the same way that free beer is. The idea is to avoid restricting what messages are allowed as much as possible. It's not about giving any particular individual a platform so much as making sure that the platform is open to a variety of ideas.

I am staunchly opposed to all the “free” offerings of our more progressive presidential candidates - free healthcare, free college, etc - but free beer could sway my vote.

Re: Zuckerberg doubles down on Facebook political ads policy after Twitter ban

#59

Post by _jal » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 2:15 PM UTC

haolez wrote: post #49

I think Zuck's statement makes more sense than Jack's, where Jack said that "democracy might break if we allow those ads" (not with these exact words). It's weird to see a CEO making a statement like that, like if it was his role to protect democracy. I think Zuck sounded more professional and centered in this case.

The Zuckerbot is a functioning profit-maximizer, if that's what you mean.

Re: Zuckerberg doubles down on Facebook political ads policy after Twitter ban

#60

Post by SiempreViernes » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 2:17 PM UTC

justin66 wrote: post #29

Would anyone actually miss having their social network of choice inundating then with political ads?

Now now, it's not like advertisement in general is particularly wanted so it's deeply unfair to single out a simple global tech giant with such an insidious question!