"Chief of Advertising Integrity" does anyone take that title seriously? Forget advertising, Facebook and it's CEO himself has no integrity.
Maybe the corresponding role was "front-end marketing designer".
Facebook's advertising integrity chief leaves company
201–210 of 252 posts
Re: Facebook's advertising integrity chief leaves company
#202The censorship currently on Facebook is identical to the tactics of H1tler and his pal Dr. G0bbels.
I was banned merely for sharing my polite opinion backed up with statistics and scientific facts.
Why is that not OK?
Re: Facebook's advertising integrity chief leaves company
#203Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's something said by a 19 year old in an instant message. It doesn't mean anything, especially 17 years later.
I would say that when someone tells you who they are, you should believe them.
I would generally agree. Don’t understand why your comment is getting downvoted either...
Re: Facebook's advertising integrity chief leaves company
#204Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's something said by a 19 year old in an instant message. It doesn't mean anything, especially 17 years later.
I would say that when someone tells you who they are, you should believe them.
When you're 36, you're not really the same person you were at 19.
(hopefully)
Re: Facebook's advertising integrity chief leaves company
#205Facebook is a company that never stood by small businesses. It's also the company that manipulated users into a free basic services just to create their own walled garden in the internet. Still, sardonically they created two ad campaigns: Apple vs free internet and vs small businesses. Their whole marketing stunt was laughably wrong. No wonder their chief left the company.
> Facebook is a company that never stood by small businesses. Curious what makes you say this? Knowing a handful of small business owners, I hear lots of good things about how great FB ads are for reaching their customers without requiring multi-million dollar ad spends, agencies, etc.
I find that argument unconvincing. If there were no ads, would have people starve to death because they would not be able to find restaurants?
Also, local businesses can da a lot to turn heads without having a giant IT system spying on the people.
Sure, FB provides value to its users but when they don’t provide the service, they don’t provide it for everyone.
Local businesses spending on better signs and better service could be actually much better for the local community as the resources remain local and they get better service instead of sending their money to FB in exchange for reach shortcut.
Re: Facebook's advertising integrity chief leaves company
#206As a corporation, Facebook truly seems to be trying to improve its behavior for the benefit of society at large, but the company is finding it very difficult to do The Right Thing, because it would reduce future revenue growth, shrink long-term profitability, and hurt the company's competitive standing against the many other companies that are trying to eat Facebook's lunch every day. In the extreme, Facebook's choic…
> As a corporation, Facebook truly seems to be trying to improve its behavior for the benefit of society at large Sorry, that's a hard disagree from me and I think you couldn't be further off the mark. Facebook's entire raison d'etre from day 1 is to take as much data from as many sources as possible, then use the most powerful computers, programmed by the brightest minds, to use that data to maximise their profit wi…
I think you are making broad statements because you don't like facebook, this is fine, but its fails to add anything.
So here's the thing, Facebook has a few big issues they can see:
1) the FB brand is toxic
2) the Facebook app/site is being seen as a ghetto for extremists and arseholes
3) instagram is a fragile cashcow.
4) AR is the next platform, which they have to nail stay in the game, which requires trust.
We all know that facebook proper is full of arseholes. Its profitable for now, but if it continues to be a ghetto for karens and racist kevs (or is seen to be) then people won't advertise. They also know that content moderation is fucking hard.
However, those are the excuses. They have good, clear, well written content guidelines. The issue is, they are not enforced equally. Trump broke the rules, he should have had his pubic hair pulled out. However because he's a politician they don't want to be accused of editorialising content.
This is because The management team are moral cowards. They want to do the right thing, but they are scared of the blowback from politicians. As they have the power to really shit on their parade. Add to this mix, a strong hysterical bunch of activists shouting at them, inside and out.
This causes the management team to withdraw into their shell. They see themselves as an island of reasonableness. the oversight committee is a step to being a useful tool to measure policy change. However it requires trust.
The bottom line is this, being a mirror of society is tough, because society has a whole bunch of toxic noise shitbags. Modelling your self on free expression means allowing these dicks to tarnish you.
Re: Facebook's advertising integrity chief leaves company
#207Re: Facebook's advertising integrity chief leaves company
#208Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can't find it now, but I remember a story from somebody in the Lean Manufacturing world about a place that was having safety problems, so they appointed somebody Safety Director. This signaled to everybody that safety was that one guy's problem, not theirs. Accidents went up further and stayed up until they got rid of the Safety Directory position and made everybody responsible for safety. That resonated for me bec…
There are pros and cons of having dedicated teams for work that also has to be accomplished by other teams. For instance, it's not a good idea to skip having a security team using the logic that "other teams will just think its that one teams job." The security team provides expertise and (with cooperative management or other teams) can enact policies that influence the rest of the organization to the benefit of secu…
Aww, c'mon, tell me that QA/security/accessibility/whatever isn't regarded as a meaningless hoop to be jumped through as quickly and with the least effort possible so that you can get real work done. Ain't nobody got time for that rigamarole.
Re: Facebook's advertising integrity chief leaves company
#209Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s so gauche and embarrassing to see a serious executive announcing a principled career change through Twitter. “Tweet 6/12” ... a red flag should go up somewhere. Can you not buy a domain and link a short paragraph? This isn’t an issue related to Threader or visual reconstruction of tweets. Rather, how did society get to a place like this? It’s bananas.
you know your president announces anything, including firing people, over twitter right :D?
That tells you all you need to know about the credibility of Twitter - (also, what’s with the presumption of nationality, that’s not very useful).
Re: Facebook's advertising integrity chief leaves company
#210Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's something said by a 19 year old in an instant message. It doesn't mean anything, especially 17 years later.
I would say that when someone tells you who they are, you should believe them.
In this case it’s something expressed by a developing brain over instant messages. The way it comes across to me is as posturing by a very insecure person.
Something I’ve learned by observing judgments people around me make about others is that I’d rarely deserve or want to be judged the same way, and that the people making judgments would typically feel the same. If I were Mark being judged by messages sent online as a teenager/young adult, I don’t think I’d feel like it was rational or kind, and more opportunistic rather than necessary, productive, or helpful at all.
Having said that, evaluating him by more recent information doesn’t make me feel great about him by any means. I’m not defending him. I just don’t believe the messages are very useful information anymore - even if at the time they were perhaps an indicator of what’s to come. It’s probably more useful to look to current events to understand who he is in the present.
I see these messages passed around and referenced often and frankly it has begun to appear like a crutch for trashing the guy. Given his position in society and the amount of information available, we should all be able to collect and reference more recent and relevant information.