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

Facebook tried to make its platform a healthier place, but it got angrier

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 187 posts

Re: Facebook tried to make its platform a healthier place, but it got angrier

#101

Post by guerrilla »

mzkply wrote: post #6
maxfurman wrote: post #3

> Data scientists on that integrity team—whose job is to improve the quality and trustworthiness of content on the platform—worked on a number of potential changes to curb the tendency of the overhauled algorithm to reward outrage and lies. Mr. Zuckerberg resisted some of the proposed fixes, the documents show, because he was worried they might hurt the company’s other objective—making users engage more with Facebook…

Am I in the super-minority if I say I've unfollowed about 80% of my FB friends? I've never seen a political or outrage post in the last 3 years since I just unfollowed everyone but my closest friends and family.

I did the same. It's onlh local news, a local group and an IM client for me now. Not seen any of this stuff people are talking about and it sounds like I'm healthier for it.

Re: Facebook tried to make its platform a healthier place, but it got angrier

#102

Post by owl_troupe »

foofoo4u wrote: post #63

Excerpts from one of the leaked documents. Disturbing.: > Research conducted in the EU reveals that political parties "feel strongly that the change to the algorithm has forced them to skew negative in their communications on Facebook, with the downstream effect of leading them into more extreme policy positions." For example, in Poland, "one party’s social media management team estimates that they have shifted the p…

> For example, in Poland, "one party’s social media management team estimates that they have shifted the proportion of their posts from 50/50 positive/negative to 80% negative and 20% positive, explicitly as a function of the change to the algorithm… Many parties, including those that have shifted strongly to the negative, worry about the long-term effects on democracy."

Not only democracy but, eventually, world peace. There are an increasing number of countries turning toward authoritarianism and the effects here could not only polarize political discourse, but also international relations.

Re: Facebook tried to make its platform a healthier place, but it got angrier

#103

Post by yosito »

foofoo4u wrote: post #63

Excerpts from one of the leaked documents. Disturbing.: > Research conducted in the EU reveals that political parties "feel strongly that the change to the algorithm has forced them to skew negative in their communications on Facebook, with the downstream effect of leading them into more extreme policy positions." For example, in Poland, "one party’s social media management team estimates that they have shifted the p…

> the change to the algorithm has forced them to skew negative in their communications on Facebook

I suspect that one of the reasons for this is that negative reactions to posts (like anger) actually have a positive effect on engagement. Facebook never really implemented any kind of downvote like other platforms have. Downvotes tend to suppress content that people don't want to see.

Re: Facebook tried to make its platform a healthier place, but it got angrier

#104

Post by Falling3 »

moate wrote: post #71
fortuna86 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Facebook is actually an incredible tool to connect with other people. I guess you have to be a certain age, being < 40 you aren't going to meet anyone on FB anymore.

As someone in that cohort who was also there for the "glory" days of early FB (when you had to have a college email to sign up), I have to agree that at this point the idea of making friends on FB weirds me out. How? Why? FB is what my racist parents use to circle jerk conspiracy theories with their friends in Cabo. Who in their right mind wants that anymore? (This is a rhetorical question, I understand there are sti…

> As someone in that cohort who was also there for the "glory" days of early FB (when you had to have a college email to sign up), I have to agree that at this point the idea of making friends on FB weirds me out. How? Why?

I was a freshman when Facebook was introduced and required a .edu email. I've used it on and off since the beginning. I've made lots of friends there - both local and in other states/countries. It usually comes down to interactions in groups for niche interests. Why is this so striking to you?

Re: Facebook tried to make its platform a healthier place, but it got angrier

#105

Post by sbierwagen »

donmcronald wrote: post #88
mrweasel wrote: post #10

One reason why Facebook keeps failing in increasing "meaningful social interaction" could be because they at the same time tries to sell ads. It seems like it would be easy to simply exclude "reshares" from users news feed. They could try to: "Sort by date" and "only posts posted/shared by my friend directly". Personally I think that would remove much of the toxicity. Secondly, simply ban news sites from the platform…

> Facebook is trying to fix an algorithm that can't possibly work, because it has two opposing jobs, increase time spend on the platform and at the same time it has to downplay the content people engages with the most. Would it be fair to say they're trying to increase time spent by existing users on the site? Does Facebook have such a huge number of users there's no growth from building a better product? I personall…

> Does Facebook have such a huge number of users there's no growth from building a better product?

https://www.statista.com/statistics/264810/number-of-monthly...

>How many users does Facebook have? With roughly 2.89 billion monthly active users as of the second quarter of 2021

>MAU: A registered active user who logged in and visited Facebook through the website, mobile app, or Messenger application in the last 30 days as of the date of measurement.

It would be physically possible to have better engagement, yes. But they're already the most wildly used website/software platform/media outlet in the history of humanity. Given from how much regulatory attention they're attracting, you could make a solid argument as a PM that it would be better for the company to reduce MAUs and spike user logins. From how Congress is talking, they're not far from just ordering Facebook to be shut down, which will reduce MAU to 0.

Re: Facebook tried to make its platform a healthier place, but it got angrier

#106

Post by q-big »

elliekelly wrote: post #70
mrweasel wrote: post #10

One reason why Facebook keeps failing in increasing "meaningful social interaction" could be because they at the same time tries to sell ads. It seems like it would be easy to simply exclude "reshares" from users news feed. They could try to: "Sort by date" and "only posts posted/shared by my friend directly". Personally I think that would remove much of the toxicity. Secondly, simply ban news sites from the platform…

I think another factor is that they’re trying to quickly turn a massive ship that has, for years, self-selected users intent on heading in the direction of outrage and toxicity. The people who are the most “engaged” with the platform are the people who get a dopamine rush from arguing and baiting and instigating. The nice people who just want to see what their friends are up to have either left or significantly scale…

> I think that makes any algorithmic “fix” much harder. Or perhaps even impossible.

Optimize for another metric than engagement.

Re: Facebook tried to make its platform a healthier place, but it got angrier

#107

Post by wussboy »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #26
warning26 wrote: post #4

It all comes down to every PM's favorite metric: engagement . When users get into a heated flamewar, that's high-engagement. So you want to do everything you can to ensure that the most possible users get sucked into flamewars. I feel like this should be banned, but it's unclear what the best approach would be. Mandating chronological feed order?

> it's unclear what the best approach would be. Mandating chronological feed order? I'd use the laws around tobacco as a framework. Ban the opening of social media accounts for children under 13; restrict it for adolescents. Ban marketing for social media over a certain size (the caveat to preserve the threat of new entrants). Require warning labels; for minors, the warning should be attested to by a parent or guardi…

I love this. Interacting with other humans online isn't evil, our current social media has made it evil. But it can be fixed and I think what you're outlining would be a great start.

I'd add that a "no marketing/algo/data collection" option should be required that users would need to opt out of (although I would settle for opt in).

Re: Facebook tried to make its platform a healthier place, but it got angrier

#109

Post by seattle_spring »

somedude895 wrote: post #76
elliekelly wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think another factor is that they’re trying to quickly turn a massive ship that has, for years, self-selected users intent on heading in the direction of outrage and toxicity. The people who are the most “engaged” with the platform are the people who get a dopamine rush from arguing and baiting and instigating. The nice people who just want to see what their friends are up to have either left or significantly scale…

Anecdotally this is what I've been seeing over the years. Most of my friends and acquaintances seem to have left Facebook behind and moved to Insta. The people that stayed on FB are mostly those who like to express strong opinions and engage in pointless discussions.

Sadly, some of my friends now use Insta to propagate the same level of political vitriol as they did on FB. They just leverage text overlays to accomplish their goal.

Re: Facebook tried to make its platform a healthier place, but it got angrier

#110

Post by fortuna86 »

Falling3 wrote: post #104
moate wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone in that cohort who was also there for the "glory" days of early FB (when you had to have a college email to sign up), I have to agree that at this point the idea of making friends on FB weirds me out. How? Why? FB is what my racist parents use to circle jerk conspiracy theories with their friends in Cabo. Who in their right mind wants that anymore? (This is a rhetorical question, I understand there are sti…

> As someone in that cohort who was also there for the "glory" days of early FB (when you had to have a college email to sign up), I have to agree that at this point the idea of making friends on FB weirds me out. How? Why? I was a freshman when Facebook was introduced and required a .edu email. I've used it on and off since the beginning. I've made lots of friends there - both local and in other states/countries. It…

Meeting people online before you know them offline is always a risk. People are good at misrepresenting themselves online (either on purpose or by accident).
Post reply on HN