41–50 of 122 posts
It’s important to point out that Facebook has an Ads library that allows you to research currently running ads for a given Facebook page and for politics, social issue, or election ads there is an API. While these capabilities do not map 1:1 to how this plugin works it seems like a bit of a middle ground for the researchers to be able to research ads without risking privacy of people or violating terms of service. (D…
For once, can we have articles (or even opinion pieces) which try to explain the context and position of both sides rather than pieces such as these. These kind of writings do nothing to change the mind of anyone. For someone who hates FB and its practices, they reinforce the already held belief. And for those, who are skeptical of such media articles, they would be put off by the language used. And make no mistake,…
> isnt that close to how Cambridge Analytica happened? Yes, its exactly this. "Facebook changes based on past scandal for the better, and this is bad. here is my 9th grade essay with no research just feeling" Facebook _should_ be held to account. I personally don't think that the advertising is actually that much of a problem. It all has paper trails because they have to pay. Advertising is not the worst part of face…
Facebook was used to illegally infuence elections in Uk and break spending rules and because of their closed nature, nobody realised untill a whistleblower stepped forwards. Its a massive problem, and maybe we would not have Brexit without it.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-44856992
A TV ad, by comparison, is aired publically and you can see it and ask who paid for it.
It’s important to point out that Facebook has an Ads library that allows you to research currently running ads for a given Facebook page and for politics, social issue, or election ads there is an API. While these capabilities do not map 1:1 to how this plugin works it seems like a bit of a middle ground for the researchers to be able to research ads without risking privacy of people or violating terms of service. (D…
And the link you shared doesn't have any information how ads are targeted. Stop using Privacy as a PR stunt. I trust those researcher with my data than facebook.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> isnt that close to how Cambridge Analytica happened? Close to. But different. Cambridge Analytica drew from Facebook’s servers. This plug-in pulls from users’ computers. Cambridge Analytica was not academically affiliated. This is legitimate research. Cambridge was closed source. This is open. Most importantly, users are explicitly sharing their data with NYU. There is no carrot of a personality quiz to obscure the…
Cambridge Analytica was academically affiliated. The data they got was laundered through a University of Cambridge researcher Aleksandr Kogan, and their app claimed to be using the data for legitimate academic research. I’m not saying it’s exactly the same, but the fundamental challenge is still present: how can Facebook be sure that these researchers won’t share the data with some controversial organization?
I have recently started supporting a ban on targeted advertising. Dividing people into cultural bubbles and being able to spend unlimited dollars on it is dangerous if we are to maintain cultural unity and be able to agree on facts. Also, when your advertising is not public and only visible to subsections of people, it is more difficult to investigate what is going on. Facebook can do it themselves, but do we want to…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> isnt that close to how Cambridge Analytica happened? Yes, its exactly this. "Facebook changes based on past scandal for the better, and this is bad. here is my 9th grade essay with no research just feeling" Facebook _should_ be held to account. I personally don't think that the advertising is actually that much of a problem. It all has paper trails because they have to pay. Advertising is not the worst part of face…
> "I personally don't think that the advertising is actually that much of a problem" Facebook was used to illegally infuence elections in Uk and break spending rules and because of their closed nature, nobody realised untill a whistleblower stepped forwards. Its a massive problem, and maybe we would not have Brexit without it. www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-44856992 A TV ad, by comparison, is aired publically and…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "I personally don't think that the advertising is actually that much of a problem" Facebook was used to illegally infuence elections in Uk and break spending rules and because of their closed nature, nobody realised untill a whistleblower stepped forwards. Its a massive problem, and maybe we would not have Brexit without it. www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-44856992 A TV ad, by comparison, is aired publically and…
The question is the degree to which advertising actually influences behavior. It must have some effect, I’d agree, but was Cambridge Analytica’s ad targeting so powerful that a 1.3 million vote margin was entirely their doing? I’m pretty skeptical.
We have Edward Bernays standard of advertising coupled with the power of Facebook available for everyone, including people who lie through their teeth to get what they wanted.
Furthermore, there is evidence Russian trolls influenced the Brexit campaign, and if that isn't enough: it was a moment in polls where leavers indeed won, but before and after the referendum it was more votes for stay and for leave.
I'm actually glad The Netherlands quit with referendum. Elections are very tough nowadays because of how easy people are influenced.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "I personally don't think that the advertising is actually that much of a problem" Facebook was used to illegally infuence elections in Uk and break spending rules and because of their closed nature, nobody realised untill a whistleblower stepped forwards. Its a massive problem, and maybe we would not have Brexit without it. www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-44856992 A TV ad, by comparison, is aired publically and…
The question is the degree to which advertising actually influences behavior. It must have some effect, I’d agree, but was Cambridge Analytica’s ad targeting so powerful that a 1.3 million vote margin was entirely their doing? I’m pretty skeptical.
I have recently started supporting a ban on targeted advertising. Dividing people into cultural bubbles and being able to spend unlimited dollars on it is dangerous if we are to maintain cultural unity and be able to agree on facts. Also, when your advertising is not public and only visible to subsections of people, it is more difficult to investigate what is going on. Facebook can do it themselves, but do we want to…
If you want to have a look at a world without Internet targeting and cultural bubbles, go to the "Trending" tab in YouTube.
If you pay for advertisement, you would not be able to target it based on personal data of the viewers.