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

Facebook executives shut down efforts to make the site less divisive

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 1001 posts

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

#161

Post by vtail »

pacala wrote: post #142
vtail wrote: post #100

Disclaimer: I started working at FB recently. Consider the following model scenario. You are a PM at a discussion board startup in Elbonia. There are too many discussions at every single time, so you personalize the list for each user, showing only discussions she is more likely to interact with (it's a crude indication of user interest, but it's tough to measure it accurately). One day, your brilliant data scientist…

Predicting political preferences is a huge can of worms. Don't do it. Have the data scientist delete their model.

They did as you say (you are a PM, after all!), and next week they rolled out the "likelihood of engagement" model. An independent analysis by another team member, familiar with the old model, confirmed that it was still mostly driven by politics (there is nothing much going on in Elbonia, besides politics), but politics was neither the direct objective not an explicit factor in the model.

The observed behavior is the same: using the new model, most people are still shown highly polarized posts, as indicated by subjective assessment of user research professionals.

What should you do now?

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

#162

Post by DSingularity »

NoodleIncident wrote: post #131
yumraj wrote: 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…

> some product/feature has harmful effect of something/someone but is good for the business of the company If you start with such black-and-white assumptions, you will never be able to actually empathize with those people. Nothing is that simple when you're close enough to see the details. Things good for the company should be and frequently are good for the people using the product. The same thing can also harm the…

People are more isolated in the real world? Please provide a source. Aside from the fact that this is hard to measure now that the underlying medium has itself been modified — I would hardly expect this to be the case. Online I am connected to those whom I socialize with or am otherwise professionally connected to. In the “real world” this constraint is largely absent.

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

#163

Post by 082349872349872 »

daenz wrote: post #12

Facebook discovers profitable strategy that news organizations have been using for decades.

They even have the same business model, in which users are not the customers. If you are Sylvester McMonkey McBean, you do not want to place ad impressions in groups of star- and plain-bellied sneetches who share an interest in underwater basket weaving. You will happily spend to place impressions for star-on machines among groups of plain-bellied sneetches, and star-off among star-bellied.

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

#164

Post by fach »

seek3r00 wrote: post #127
vtail wrote: post #100

Disclaimer: I started working at FB recently. Consider the following model scenario. You are a PM at a discussion board startup in Elbonia. There are too many discussions at every single time, so you personalize the list for each user, showing only discussions she is more likely to interact with (it's a crude indication of user interest, but it's tough to measure it accurately). One day, your brilliant data scientist…

No, it would not be my job to decide which discussions should a user be driven to. If a user is driven to political discussions, so be it. Sure, this is good for the company because it means the user will spend more time on the platform, but it is a side effect really.

I would think engagement would be a core metric you would be measured against in this example. And if that’s the case, this certainly isn’t a side effect.

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

#165

Post by pkilgore »

LordHumungous wrote: post #33

> 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.

Imagine an average level of civility in a society `C`.

Lets say users of your product, due to your product, operate at `0.5 C`.

Is changing the product so they operate at a higher `0.75 C` or back to `C` "paternalistic"?

Why?

I can see the argument for moving `C` to `1.5 C` as paternalistic. But when you're already actively affecting `C` in one way, why do we moralize about moving it the other way? What makes down OK, but up BAD?

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

#166

Post by bookmarkable »

Perhaps important journalism, but it is behind a paywall, so apparently WSJ is satisfied that only their subscribers know this information about Facebook.

Meanwhile, Facebook is not behind a paywall, so they can monitor the conversations of billions of people despite monthly stories that circulate illustrating gross misconduct.

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

#167

Post by [deleted] »

whathappenedto wrote: post #114
dfxm12 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree and think it is significantly different. Facebook decision makers have way more agency in the directions their company takes than a consumer has in their choice of clothes to buy at Target (or wherever). Shirt consumers don't have much of a choice. They can only buy what's for sale (and in their price range). And then, how can they be sure if a shirt was or wasn't made by child labor? How would an individu…

I actually feel the opposite. Consumers have the ultimate choice -- their choice is not beholden to anyone except themselves. Then they can execute their choice unilaterally. A VP or even the CEO is beholden to shareholders, their employees, their advertisers, their own ethics, their users, various government regulations (and government interests that are not laws but what they prefer). So almost everything they do i…

[deleted]

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

#168

Post by dahart »

yumraj wrote: 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 cannot believe that everyone is ethically challenged

Right, so what assumptions are leading to the conclusion that this situation can only be caused by everyone being ethically challenged? Are ethics shared and absolute enough for the answer to this question to be easy or black & white? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_relativism

> Luckily I’ve never had to face such a dilemma

Are you certain about that? I realize you’re talking specifically about C-level execs debating something in a board room, but consider the ways that we all face lesser versions of the same dilemma. For example, do you ever consume and/or pay money for things that are generally harmful to society? Environmental concerns are easy to pick on since more or less everything we buy has negative environmental effects... ever bought a car? flown on an airplane? Smoked a cigarette or enjoyed a backyard fire pit? Bought anything unnecessarily wrapped in plastic? It’s really hard to make the less harmful choice, and a lot of people don’t care at all, so by and large as a society we put up with the harm in favor of convenience. As consumers, we are at least half of the equation that is leading to socially harmful products existing. If we didn’t consume it, the company meetings wouldn’t have anything to debate.

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

#169

Post by dkn775 »

pacala wrote: post #142
vtail wrote: post #100

Disclaimer: I started working at FB recently. Consider the following model scenario. You are a PM at a discussion board startup in Elbonia. There are too many discussions at every single time, so you personalize the list for each user, showing only discussions she is more likely to interact with (it's a crude indication of user interest, but it's tough to measure it accurately). One day, your brilliant data scientist…

Predicting political preferences is a huge can of worms. Don't do it. Have the data scientist delete their model.

Agreed, as a general rule I shy away from predicting things I wouldn't claim expertise in otherwise. This is why consulting with subject matter experts is important. Things as innocuous as traffic crashes and speeding tickets are a huge world unbeknownst to the casual analyst (the field of "Traffic Records")

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

#170

Post by maest »

supernova87a wrote: post #149

I really didn't realize until perhaps the last 2 years that Facebook fundamentally tapped some hidden human need/instinct to argue with people who they believe are incorrect. Specifically, and more importantly, combined with the human inability to actively decide to not pay attention when things are inconsequential or not yet worth arguing about. Sometimes, just shutting up about an issue and not discussing it is the…

That's an interesting thought, for sure. I should point out that this doesn't only apply to facebook, but other large discussion forums as well: reddit, 4chan, tumblr, twitter etc.
Post reply on HN