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

961–970 of 1001 posts

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

#961

Post by close04 »

disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #953
close04 wrote: post #949

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does this mean you consider scale to be irrelevant to this situation? Because that's pretty much what the difference boils down to. You mention "media" as s singular entity but in reality the media of the past was a mosaic of thousands of individual outlets, newspapers, radios, TV stations. Today FB is a singular entity with the combined power of most of those together. Do you agree that changes the game? FB has almo…

But it's not. The news on Facebook is in fact those newspapers, TV shows and whatnot, plus loads more amateurs than ever before. They are a platform rather than a publisher, in my view at least.

Saying that scale is irrelevant makes me think you are intentionally obtuse about this. FB picks which newspaper's article to show you just like newspapers choose which journalist's article to show you. And just like newspapers give a tremendous amount of power to one individual (the journalist) compared to another (you), FB can do the same for individual articles and outlets. Except FB has the kind of reach no newspaper ever had or will. They give a podium for others to climb on, they decide who gets the front seats, and they monetize it.

For all intents and purposes they should be responsible for everything that happens on the platform regardless of where the content was picked up from. They should have a responsibility but this comes in conflict with their goal to to drive engagement and profits.

Their algorithm curates what people see, shows specific links, and influences opinions. And when you can influence opinions on such a large scale and monetize it we have a conflict of interest and even a weapon. FB and others have proven this in the past. Why do you think the media is regulated so tightly around election time? FB can take even a blog post and push it so aggressively right before elections that they manage to sway opinions but still claim they were just a platform.

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

#962

Post by ccktlmazeltov »

guy_ro wrote: post #758

Hey, Facebook VP of Integrity here (I work on this stuff). This WSJ story cites old research and falsely suggests we aren’t invested in fighting polarization. The reality is we didn’t adopt some of the product suggestions cited because we pursued alternatives we believed are more effective. What’s undeniable is we’ve made significant changes to the way FB works to improve the integrity of our products, such as fundam…

Thanks for chiming in here! Honestly the response to your comment reminds me of the youtube comment section. I'm not sure why people aren't capable of civil discourse, would have expected better from HN.

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

#963

Post by ccktlmazeltov »

binxbolling wrote: post #931
guy_ro wrote: post #758

Hey, Facebook VP of Integrity here (I work on this stuff). This WSJ story cites old research and falsely suggests we aren’t invested in fighting polarization. The reality is we didn’t adopt some of the product suggestions cited because we pursued alternatives we believed are more effective. What’s undeniable is we’ve made significant changes to the way FB works to improve the integrity of our products, such as fundam…

If you're not being given the benefit of the doubt, it's because your employer has 16 years of lying about this and related issues. Zuck long ago torched whatever shred of trust ever existed, so no, we are not going to be impressed by an extra 0.003% of annual revenue thrown to problems you've created.

Can we make this thread informative instead of a youtube comment section?

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

#964

Post by ccktlmazeltov »

ppalevsky wrote: post #811
guy_ro wrote: post #758

Hey, Facebook VP of Integrity here (I work on this stuff). This WSJ story cites old research and falsely suggests we aren’t invested in fighting polarization. The reality is we didn’t adopt some of the product suggestions cited because we pursued alternatives we believed are more effective. What’s undeniable is we’ve made significant changes to the way FB works to improve the integrity of our products, such as fundam…

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."

Can we make this thread informative instead of a youtube comment section?

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

#965

Post by munificent »

stonogo wrote: post #687
munificent wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fundamental flaw is this: The primary content no user wants to see any every user agent would filter out is ads . Since ads are the primary way sites stay in business, they are obligated to fight against user agents or other intermediary systems. The ultimate problem is that Facebook doesn't want to show you good, enriching content from your friends and family. They want to show you ads. The good content is just…

I sure am tired of hearing about "the fundamental flaw" in empowering people. What you describe is not a flaw in empowerment, it's a flaw in their business model, and it's one that can that be fixed (i.e. "innovate a better business model"). Can we stop propagating the idea that people who do not want to use their limited bandwidth and processing power to rasterize someone else's advertising are somehow "flawed"? The…

> I sure am tired of hearing about "the fundamental flaw" in empowering people.

I'm all for empowering people. But adding personally controlled user agents to Facebook is a fundamentally flawed solution. There is no path for that to succeed because the primary content users will want to filter is ads, and the primary content Facebook needs people to see is ads. Thus user agents are an existential threat to Facebook and since Facebook controls all the content, they will ensure user agents are not allowed.

The core business model does not align Facebook's incentives with user's incentives. You can't fix that at the content level.

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

#966

Post by 1123581321 »

evgen wrote: post #905
1123581321 wrote: post #853

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His work history is on LinkedIn. VP Integrity is essentially an executive product management role so qualifications would be along those lines. Edit: LinkedIn says he was an engineering manager, then took a series of roles culminating in a data startup that got him into Facebook in the current role.

'A data startup'? How very generous of you. He co-founded a spyware company that was bought by Facebook to discover what other companies/apps to buy or clone. You do not get to the position he has at Facebook by having either ethics or morals. Having seen this up close at Facebook HQ I can assure you that everyone at VP level or above there knows what they are doing, knows the long-term consequences, and simply does…

Thank you for examining his career more closely.

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

#967

Post by blaser-waffle »

srj wrote: post #867
Zandikar wrote: post #835

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook having a "VP of Integrity" is laughable. They must have workshopped it and discovered "Minister of Truth" was a bit too on the nose.

Why is that laughable? If the company wants to be receptive to its critics isn't it reasonable for them to create such a role?

Being receptive and responsive to critics is a function of marketing. And that's what this is -- marketing.

Further more just because the role exists doesn't mean it matters. My Org has all sorts of diversity and sustainability managers, and their relevance ends the moment business decisions come into play.

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

#968

Post by seph-reed »

matz1 wrote: post #708
seph-reed wrote: post #642

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are you defending Zuckerberg for being a dick? If you have power, you have responsibility: full fucking stop. The idea that it's okay to be a selfish child with power is tantamount to allowing driving while drunk. Power is deadly, you can just as easily crush a persons life as you could their legs with a car. Don't drive drunk, don't be in power if you can't be a responsible citizen about it.

The poster doesn't defending Zuckerberg, merely trying to explain why Zuckerberg did what he did. >If you have power, you have responsibility: full fucking stop. No, if you have power you get to decide the rule. Same as drunk driving, the reason we are not allowing driving while drunk is because the people who are against drunk driving has more power than the people who are pro drunk driving. The side that has more p…

You're confusing legal responsibility with responsibility proper.

Dictators are responsible for the death of millions, even if they make laws that say otherwise.

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

#969

Post by anewdirection »

FemmeAndroid wrote: post #906
guy_ro wrote: post #758

Hey, Facebook VP of Integrity here (I work on this stuff). This WSJ story cites old research and falsely suggests we aren’t invested in fighting polarization. The reality is we didn’t adopt some of the product suggestions cited because we pursued alternatives we believed are more effective. What’s undeniable is we’ve made significant changes to the way FB works to improve the integrity of our products, such as fundam…

Meta question. How is this post from a user created 6 hours ago, with 66 Karma at the top of this comment section? This is particularly interesting since just this week, TripleByte’s CEO’s top level comments were buried. Is there some kind of change or is this really the naturally occurring top comment?

HN has many employees of faang companies as users. Some paid to be here. You can work the rest out yourself.

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

#970

Post by theFeller00 »

guy_ro wrote: post #758

Hey, Facebook VP of Integrity here (I work on this stuff). This WSJ story cites old research and falsely suggests we aren’t invested in fighting polarization. The reality is we didn’t adopt some of the product suggestions cited because we pursued alternatives we believed are more effective. What’s undeniable is we’ve made significant changes to the way FB works to improve the integrity of our products, such as fundam…

Not much to add other than I absolutely hate your company.
Post reply on HN