Live data from Hacker News

Facebook executives shut down efforts to make the site less divisive

wsj.com

51–60 of 1001 posts

Re: Facebook executives shut down efforts to make the site less divisive

#51

> Facebook policy chief Joel Kaplan, who played a central role in vetting proposed changes, argued at the time that efforts to make conversations on the platform more civil were “paternalistic,” said people familiar with his comments. I think Joel was right.

I, too, agree. Facebook is just an extension of the open society.

Re: Facebook executives shut down efforts to make the site less divisive

#52

I hate FB as much as the next guy but I think that Facebook is an amplifier of other trends. I think that the underlying issue is the two party system. The echo chambers get amplified.

The two party system does not affect this discussion. Facebook's algos will show you more and more $x content if you've liked $x or subscribed to it, and never show you $y content since you'd probably not like and engage with $y. Doesn't matter how many parties/topics/underlyingIssues there are.

If FB were neutral they would show you every FB post, millions per second whizzing past your screen, but they can't do this, they have to curate a wall for you to slowly scroll through and for most revenue, like, share, or comment on.

Therefore, to show you the most content that you will like, share, or comment on, they repeat the type ($x) you've already liked, creating the echo.

So no, it is not mostly a problem of the underlying issue of the two parties, this is entirely about how FB curates your wall and simply doesn't show you "the other party"/$y or anything deviant/$y of your likes.

Edit: changed political parties to variables to illustrate point.

Re: Facebook executives shut down efforts to make the site less divisive

#53
post #17

I've always wondered how such discussions go in company meetings where some product/feature has harmful effect of something/someone but is good for the business of the company. I cannot believe that everyone is ethicality challenged, only perhaps the people in control. So what goes through that minds of people who don't agree with such decisions. Do they keep quiet, just worry about the payroll, convince themselves t…

People are capable of all sorts of mental gymnastics to keep things at arm's length. Bad practice X is because of group Y or requirement Z.

Re: Facebook executives shut down efforts to make the site less divisive

#54
post #17

I've always wondered how such discussions go in company meetings where some product/feature has harmful effect of something/someone but is good for the business of the company. I cannot believe that everyone is ethicality challenged, only perhaps the people in control. So what goes through that minds of people who don't agree with such decisions. Do they keep quiet, just worry about the payroll, convince themselves t…

People tend to rationalize it as not that ethically challenging or by compensating through some other societal benefit.

I knew someone who ran a FB group that devolved into conspiracy theories and absurd levels of anger to the point that members of the group were lashing out at local politicians.

The group owner liked the power and influence so rationalized it as "increasing public engagement in politics." This person is otherwise a vegetarian who fosters animals and works in the medical field.

Re: Facebook executives shut down efforts to make the site less divisive

#55
post #39
post #17

I've always wondered how such discussions go in company meetings where some product/feature has harmful effect of something/someone but is good for the business of the company. I cannot believe that everyone is ethicality challenged, only perhaps the people in control. So what goes through that minds of people who don't agree with such decisions. Do they keep quiet, just worry about the payroll, convince themselves t…

Boeing 737 MAX killed 346 people. So, it seems that death is not a deterrent. The mails from the case are good to understand the internal discussions: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/jan/10/737-max-sca...

> "Boeing 737 MAX killed 346 people. So, it seems that death is not a deterrent."

I really don't understand your point, unless you're implying that there was a meeting where Boeing planned to kill those people. I am not an aviation expert, but what happened with the MAX seems to be a product of the certification process, urgent business needs, systems engineering issues, and bad internal communications at Boeing.

I haven't seen any evidence that someone specifically predicted the chain of events which would unfold on those flights, and clearly communicated the issue, then had executive(s) respond that it was 'worth the money'.

As an aside, I have seen quotes about the 787, which were similar to those in your linked article (mostly with respect to production quality issues), yet the 787 has not had similar accidents. One problem with working on such huge projects is that the line engineers do not understand that managers are constantly hearing alarmist 'warnings' which don't pan out. If 1% of Boeing staff give false alarms in a year, that means there are 1600 false alarms.

Re: Facebook executives shut down efforts to make the site less divisive

#56
People always blame Facebook when the existence of Internet forums has always led to radicalization of individuals. Facebook's crime is making forums accessible to all.

These are just your fellow people. This is how they are in the situation that they're in. So be it. Let them speak to others like them.

The cost of that is many angry people. The benefit of that is that folks like me can find my people. That benefit outweighs the cost.

This is just the price of the open society.

Re: Facebook executives shut down efforts to make the site less divisive

#57
post #39
post #17

I've always wondered how such discussions go in company meetings where some product/feature has harmful effect of something/someone but is good for the business of the company. I cannot believe that everyone is ethicality challenged, only perhaps the people in control. So what goes through that minds of people who don't agree with such decisions. Do they keep quiet, just worry about the payroll, convince themselves t…

Boeing 737 MAX killed 346 people. So, it seems that death is not a deterrent. The mails from the case are good to understand the internal discussions: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/jan/10/737-max-sca...

> So, it seems that death is not a deterrent.

Well, the tobacco industry is still alive and well, and those companies literally peddle death.

Re: Facebook executives shut down efforts to make the site less divisive

#58
post #17

I've always wondered how such discussions go in company meetings where some product/feature has harmful effect of something/someone but is good for the business of the company. I cannot believe that everyone is ethicality challenged, only perhaps the people in control. So what goes through that minds of people who don't agree with such decisions. Do they keep quiet, just worry about the payroll, convince themselves t…

I think it's mostly denialism (which is cultivated by management). This is a great article about it: https://newrepublic.com/article/155212/worked-capital-one-fi...

Re: Facebook executives shut down efforts to make the site less divisive

#59

Nationalize Facebook.

People are reflexively downvoting you, but actual discussion would be nice.

After all, the postal service is in the constitution, so this country started with an essential communication service nationalized from the outset.

What if Facebook was government funded and supported in the same manner, instead of privately advertiser-funded?

Re: Facebook executives shut down efforts to make the site less divisive

#60
post #17

I've always wondered how such discussions go in company meetings where some product/feature has harmful effect of something/someone but is good for the business of the company. I cannot believe that everyone is ethicality challenged, only perhaps the people in control. So what goes through that minds of people who don't agree with such decisions. Do they keep quiet, just worry about the payroll, convince themselves t…

From my experience there are very strong currents in a group that are very hard to go against as an individual. Only very contrarian people will go against the grain in formal meetings with high level executives or other individuals with status in a group. This is why often big organizations are able to produce decisions that the team behind it doesn't agree with and that look silly from the outside. Many people in such a team will not feel personally responsible because they feel like they didn't have any influence on the decision making proces, even if they could have said something. There are other dynamics at play I think, but this is one of them. (The contrarians seem to not survive long in the corporate world)
Post reply on HN