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

Facebook's PR feels broken

themargins.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 262 posts

Re: Facebook's PR feels broken

#51

Post by JohnFen »

Seenso wrote: post #38
OnlineGladiator wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The logical conclusion of their own argument is that Facebook should be broken up. Luckily you don't need logic when you can just throw money at lobbying. Sadly, this is incredibly effective in the US today.

> Luckily you don't need logic when you can just throw money at lobbying. Sadly, this is incredibly effective in the US today. Even if that's true, it might not work for Facebook. The politicians that Facebook would need to lobby may feel personally threatened by Facebook's power over the electoral process. Penny-ante campaign contributions and a few face to face meetings probably aren't enough to overcome that.

> Penny-ante campaign contributions and a few face to face meetings probably aren't enough to overcome that.

True, but a promise to use that power to benefit particular politicians probably would.

Re: Facebook's PR feels broken

#53

Post by ptcampbell »

ar_lan wrote: post #23

The beginning of this article really plays out like the author is just against Zuckerberg simply talking to people with conservative viewpoints. Being willing (and encouraging) others to listen to other viewpoints should not be considered a PR issue.

That is what Zuck thought. And it would be missing the point. That is not what the author took issue with.

Re: Facebook's PR feels broken

#54

Post by empath75 »

farisjarrah wrote: post #20
drewrv wrote: post #15

It still amazes me that the line of reasoning they publicly went with, around their decision not to fact check political advertisements, is that no one company should have that amount of power. The logical conclusion of their own argument is that Facebook should be broken up.

While I agree Facebook is doing a bad job with regards to political advertising, I am actually really glad facebook isnt stepping in and deciding whats truthful or not. Does anyone really think that we should give Facebook any power over our political system or give them the power to be the gatekeepers of what political ads we see? I think facebook should do what twitter did and just totally get out of the political…

They decide through their algorithms and advertising platform what people see and what they don't see, already.

Re: Facebook's PR feels broken

#55

Post by hinkley »

Stifling a glib, sarcastic response, who do we feel has good PR that's working, and not in some sinister meaning of 'working'?

What groups and activities do people who think this way hold up as positive role models?

Re: Facebook's PR feels broken

#56

Post by Diederich »

arrosenberg wrote: post #39
farisjarrah wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I agree Facebook is doing a bad job with regards to political advertising, I am actually really glad facebook isnt stepping in and deciding whats truthful or not. Does anyone really think that we should give Facebook any power over our political system or give them the power to be the gatekeepers of what political ads we see? I think facebook should do what twitter did and just totally get out of the political…

Disagree. Since they have chosen to platform those ads, they should at least be held to the same standards as networks and not show ads that are provably false. It would be better if they didn't platform them, or better yet, they didn't have that much potential influence in the first place.

> same standards as networks and not show ads that are provably false

I was going to ask you for a reference on this, because I was pretty sure that no such standard existed.

I was quite wrong!

https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/complaints-about-broadc...

"Broadcasters are responsible for selecting the broadcast material that airs on their stations, including advertisements. The FCC expects broadcasters to be responsible to the community they serve and act with reasonable care to ensure that advertisements aired on their stations are not false or misleading.

The FTC has primary responsibility for determining whether specific advertising is false or misleading, and for taking action against the sponsors of such material. You can file a complaint with the FTC online or call toll-free 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357)."

So we have:

"The FCC expects broadcasters to be responsible to the community they serve and act with reasonable care"

and

"The FTC has primary responsibility for determining"

So...maybe we should give online advertising the same treatment?

As an aside: this FCC regulation surprises me; I'm quite aware that there are numerous limits to free speech, but I didn't expect this to be one of them.

I've always been an ardent believer in expansive free speech, and I still am, though age has allowed me to accept more limits. Though it doesn't feel right to me, the negative impact of (largely?) unregulated online political advertising is big and getting bigger.

Re: Facebook's PR feels broken

#57

Post by LanceH »

drewrv wrote: post #15

It still amazes me that the line of reasoning they publicly went with, around their decision not to fact check political advertisements, is that no one company should have that amount of power. The logical conclusion of their own argument is that Facebook should be broken up.

I think logically the government shouldn't be threatening anyone with a breakup based upon speech. I'm not sure how you get there as a logical conclusion.

I would rather risk total garbage in the public forum than establish a ministry of truth.

Re: Facebook's PR feels broken

#58

Post by JumpCrisscross »

notadoc wrote: post #32
muglug wrote: post #3

Facebook is just transitioning to becoming the digital equivalent of an oil company. They make a product that billions consume, but that many people think is doing damage to the environment (even though many of those critics still consume the product). That's why their PR machine is now switching to these slightly astroturfy campaigns. The next step is an advert along the lines of "They call it pollution. We call it…

> Facebook is just transitioning to becoming the digital equivalent of an oil company. Seems more analogous to a tobacco company. Some people think it's bad and they use it anyway.

> Seems more analogous to a tobacco company

They have an addictive product in common. But oil seems more apt.

The sale of tobacco is highly regulated. Oil, less so; Facebook, not at all.

Oil became useful in the Industrial Revolution, and enabled downstream innovation. Facebook came about amidst the modern Internet and is likewise a platform. Tobacco is old and the end of the line; the ancillary market is limited.

Finally, both oil and Facebook are tools (for some). Tobacco could be thought of as a tool, but it‘a more universally hedonistic.

Re: Facebook's PR feels broken

#59

Post by stronglikedan »

DevKoala wrote: post #52

The author reads way too much on Zuckerberg’s response. It Makes me question their perception of the events and as a result, the analysis as a whole.

If I'm interpreting it correctly, it appears that the author is actually offended at the suggestion of listening to viewpoints that conflict with their own in order to possibly learn things from it.

Re: Facebook's PR feels broken

#60

Post by IfOnlyYouKnew »

hinkley wrote: post #55

Stifling a glib, sarcastic response, who do we feel has good PR that's working, and not in some sinister meaning of 'working'? What groups and activities do people who think this way hold up as positive role models?

It's not English, unfortunately, but Berlin's subway operator (BVG) has been doing an excellent job at PR for the past 5 years or so.

They use mostly (self-deprecating) humour, both on billboards as well as individually as Twitter messages.

This strategy seems somewhat risky. There were some where I thought "funny, but I wouldn't want to be the one posting this".

Hard to describe, because it's mostly a function of each tweet being really good. They must have some larger advertising company behind this, with tons of talent.

They have seen a spectacular improvement in public approval, and even on such measures as violence against employees, fare-evasion, and vandalism.

Post reply on HN