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

Facebook to let users turn off political adverts

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 510 posts

Re: Facebook to let users turn off political adverts

#341

Post by rattray »

crazygringo wrote: post #301

This may sound positive (less ads, less disinformation) at first glance, but I think it's actually a terrible and dangerous development. Zuck has seen that he's going to get hate no matter what his political content moderation policy is, so he thinks he can escape that by literally escaping from it: letting users just turn it off. But while he has the legal right to, in the larger societal sense it's dangerously and…

Huh? This isn't a toggle to turn off political _speech_ on fb, just ads.

Or do you believe that Justice Louis Brandeis would have also demanded the societal remedy of "more ads"?

Re: Facebook to let users turn off political adverts

#342

Post by catalogia »

Justsignedup wrote: post #230
macspoofing wrote: post #109

It's a good feature from an individual perspective. It's not a good feature if you don't like cultural bubbles forming. Democrats will block Republican ads, Republicans will block Democrat ads - will that lead to a better world when Republicans can't reach Democrat voters or vice versa? I find this focus (attack?) on political advertising on social media platforms by traditional media companies to be self-serving and…

The problem is if you turn off all ads, you won't see any alternative points. I don't need Biden ads because I already will vote for Biden, so I turn off political ads. That's it I'm back in my bubble. This is a cop-out for actually having to verify/review political ads. Zuckerburg is really really good at the art of seeming like he is progressive but is empirically horrible for society.

> The problem is if you turn off all ads, you won't see any alternative points.

That's ridiculous, it's not as though Facebook ads are the only source of political information in America. Even on facebook specifically that's not true; everybody's Facebook wall will still be packed to the brim with their friends, family and neighbors still talking about politics. We're talking about politics right now, despite there not being any paid promotional material present in this thread.

Advertisers simply do not fill the vital social role you seem to attribute to them.

Re: Facebook to let users turn off political adverts

#343

Post by at_a_remove »

minikites wrote: post #312
crazygringo wrote: post #301

This may sound positive (less ads, less disinformation) at first glance, but I think it's actually a terrible and dangerous development. Zuck has seen that he's going to get hate no matter what his political content moderation policy is, so he thinks he can escape that by literally escaping from it: letting users just turn it off. But while he has the legal right to, in the larger societal sense it's dangerously and…

>The ability to close yourself off in a bubble where you can't be reached by opposing viewpoints is relinquishing your duties as a democratic citizen. This is only true if each side has a valid and reasonable difference of opinion. This is not true for hate speech and other propaganda. For example, it's not an "opposing viewpoint" to say that people with dark skin are subhuman. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propagand…

Would you apply this "hate speech" label to Yakub and such such ideas? I need to know how seriously to take you.

Re: Facebook to let users turn off political adverts

#345

Post by dfxm12 »

throawy1234 wrote: post #228
macspoofing wrote: post #109

It's a good feature from an individual perspective. It's not a good feature if you don't like cultural bubbles forming. Democrats will block Republican ads, Republicans will block Democrat ads - will that lead to a better world when Republicans can't reach Democrat voters or vice versa? I find this focus (attack?) on political advertising on social media platforms by traditional media companies to be self-serving and…

I was in the social media team of one of the Democratic presidential candidates. I agree with you. It's my belief that if you want to give a chance to lesser known candidates who are not backed by millionaires and powerful insiders, Facebook was the last option available. I believe Facebook was one of the last services available to make our democracy more democratic. I think this move by Facebook will make it so much…

The kind of stuff like union jobs/workers protection, which used to be the platform of Democrats is what Trump ran on.

Interesting to see what happens in the upcoming election since he failed to deliver worker protection (but found plenty of time to let pro-corporate judges get more power).

Re: Facebook to let users turn off political adverts

#346

Post by minikites »

crazygringo wrote: post #340
minikites wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The ability to close yourself off in a bubble where you can't be reached by opposing viewpoints is relinquishing your duties as a democratic citizen. This is only true if each side has a valid and reasonable difference of opinion. This is not true for hate speech and other propaganda. For example, it's not an "opposing viewpoint" to say that people with dark skin are subhuman. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propagand…

Yes, which is why many European countries have laws against hate speech, although the US doesn't. But political advertising doesn't equal hate speech. Many people currently support the idea of Facebook and Twitter prohibiting hate speech, political or not. That has nothing to do with being able to turn off political speech in general. It's a totally separate issue. As for propaganda, that's in the eye of the beholder…

>But political advertising doesn't equal hate speech.

It often does: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy#Evolution_(1...

>another person's deeply felt, legitimate political viewpoint

I don't think "people with dark skin are subhuman" should be treated as a legitimate political viewpoint.

Re: Facebook to let users turn off political adverts

#347

Post by bhupy »

ori_b wrote: post #334
bhupy wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"We've gone from > They actively want their users to be free to consume what they want, even if others think that’s bad for them. To "They're legally allowed to remove whatever posts they want, and they don't need to be consistent about it"." Your framing here suggests that you think that I've shifted my stance in some way, but that's not the case at all. I, as a consumer of Facebook, enjoy the platform because I can…

> The fact that Facebook appears to be running their platform with this principle is in no way inconsistent with the statement "They actively want their users to be free to consume what they want, even if others think that’s bad for them." What the hell are you talking about, "running it consistently with this principle?" Facebook is very much a platform that restricts free speech. They even restrict political speech…

> Facebook is very much a platform that restricts free speech.

I made my case for why this is not the case.

1. We agree that pornography restriction is a violation of free expression. Because there are other alternatives, I feel less bad about their restriction of it. Because there are no other alternatives to an open public square of ideas (such as Facebook), I feel stronger about it. It would obviously be ideal if Facebook took an "anything goes" approach and allowed others to build client-side tooling for individually controlled moderation.

2. To the extent that Facebook restricts speech outside of pornography, it is either speech that is a) already restricted by the legal system (false advertising, intellectual property violations, defamation) or b) an overzealous regulation of speech. Again, I reiterate: WE CAN FIND COMMON GROUND and agree that (b) is bad. Continue to call that out. Complaining about FB's political ad policies is IMO an ineffective way to change (b).

Unless you're able to address those points, you can take it or leave it.

> They even restrict political speech. Unless it comes from a political campaign. So, no, as an individual, you don't even have the option to present your own arguments.

They absolutely do not do this. Please provide evidence of this. God knows my entire feed is filled with political speech by friends and family, so if you're right about this, I may have the cudgel I need!

Re: Facebook to let users turn off political adverts

#348

Post by tenebrisalietum »

bhaavan wrote: post #213
tenebrisalietum wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> classify user generated content as political or not is non-trivial. There's probably a set of 50 or so keyword combinations, plus the names of current and former politicians and common misspellings, that would cover 90% of cases.

- He was playing poker, with a pair on the table, but his trump card was an ace. - I refuse to pay this "Bill". - That looks like an Obama suit. Are these political statements? It's naive to make such a claim that a whitelist of word is sufficient. The "facebook is censoring me" gang will eat you up in a jiffy. Even extremely complex models will fail this test.

List A: support, vote, protest, defend, military, troops, economy, country, taxes, rights, government, children, child, responsibility, leader

List B: obama, pelosi, clinton, trump, pence, mitch, reagan, bush, maga, antifa, president, congress, representative, democrat, republican

If a comment has a word from list A and list B, it's political.

Using this simple scheme on Facebook would be something I would do if possible.

Re: Facebook to let users turn off political adverts

#349

Post by sangnoir »

macspoofing wrote: post #109

It's a good feature from an individual perspective. It's not a good feature if you don't like cultural bubbles forming. Democrats will block Republican ads, Republicans will block Democrat ads - will that lead to a better world when Republicans can't reach Democrat voters or vice versa? I find this focus (attack?) on political advertising on social media platforms by traditional media companies to be self-serving and…

> will that lead to a better world when Republicans can't reach Democrat voters or vice versa?

That entirely depends on whether you think voter suppression ads are fair-play or not

Post reply on HN