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

Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 609 posts

Re: Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

#241

Post by ethbr0 »

dylan604 wrote: post #160
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> most of them don’t give a shit about the reputation of FB This is close to a straw man argument. Nobody claims users will abandon Facebook. The article posits, instead, strengthening headwinds. Headwinds in hiring (there is already a double-digit premium Facebook must pay for talent). From recurring whistleblowing, and its impact on morale and productivity. Headwinds in projects and partnerships, like Libre/Diem be…

>Headwinds in hiring (there is already a double-digit premium Facebook must pay for talent). From recurring whistleblowing, and its impact on morale and productivity. I wonder if they have interview questions to weed out potential candidates that want to work there long enough on these ridiculous salaries while they gather juicy tidbits to leak later?

"While walking along in desert sand, you suddenly look down and see a tortoise crawling toward you. You reach down and flip it over onto its back. The tortoise lies there, its belly baking in the hot sun, beating its legs, trying to turn itself over, but it cannot do so without your help. You are not helping. Why?"

Re: Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

#242

Post by hunterb123 »

unethical_ban wrote: post #232
hunterb123 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, it's a stupid plan. A whistleblower to advocate for censorship? Do they think the people are that stupid? I guess like most things they don't need the majority of public on board, just a bit of plausible deniability. If anyone was really concerned about the algorithms, they'd make transparency requirements, not censorship requirements. If anyone was really concerned about the results of teenagers in the study…

The Taliban aren't running disinformation campaigns on Americans via Facebook or Twitter. Like it or not, people care more about a problem that affects them. That's like saying "if Americans /really/ cared about democracy, they would all be advocating for an invasion of Belarus".

First off, yes they are. Second, the CCP use "disinformation" as a reason for censoring too.

Americans aren't orchestrating this, Democrats are.

The Taliban comparison was in relation to the FB Myanmar issue the "whistleblower" brought up.

Just as the TikTok comparison was in relation to the girl's study.

The point is, the Dems are laser focused on Facebook because they want to silence conservatives, not because of some virtue to help people.

Re: Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

#243

Post by snowwrestler »

ghostoftiber wrote: post #180
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> most of them don’t give a shit about the reputation of FB This is close to a straw man argument. Nobody claims users will abandon Facebook. The article posits, instead, strengthening headwinds. Headwinds in hiring (there is already a double-digit premium Facebook must pay for talent). From recurring whistleblowing, and its impact on morale and productivity. Headwinds in projects and partnerships, like Libre/Diem be…

> People didn't stop using oil after the Standard Oil break-up. Nor Windows after its antitrust brush or cigarettes after the tobacco master settlement. The power of those companies was simply sharply reduced. I actually disagree with this. When the company is forcibly broken up there's a chance that it's "power" (what?) is reduced but if we look at Standard Oil, that quicky is shown to be not-what-happened. SO becam…

Microsoft went flat for a decade after their antitrust trial. They lost many markets where they had significant footholds, struggled to attract and retain top talent, and struggled to enter new markets.

They kept making money from Windows, Office, etc. But the tech industry exploded in growth around them, leaving them behind in many ways (technologically, financially, culturally).

Re: Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

#244

Post by gorwell »

breadzeppelin__ wrote: post #29
shoto_io wrote: post #3

No. That’s what people like us and all the main stream media hope for. But: most people I know don’t have the slightest clue that Insta and WhatsApp belong to the FB group. And even worse: most of them don’t give a shit about the reputation of FB. They just want to send messages and share pictures through those apps.

To go a bit further MSM's ad revenue is being hollowed out by Facebook et al. Why would anyone pay to advertise in Economist when they can advertise to "people interested in economics, earning over 150k, last thought about cigarettes three weeks ago" etc. Similarly, if you were an advertising exec at pfizer, would you choose to pay millions of dollars to advertise your meds to a continuously shrinking audience on som…

The internet hollowed out the legacy media's business model, but it's more than that: It also destroyed the ability of the ruling class to control the narrative. Now everything they say and do is endlessly scrutinized by the internet hive mind, which embarrasses them on a daily basis. Nor does it forget `weapons of mass destruction`, `mission accomplished`, `masks don't work`, `wuhan lab leak hypothesis is a racist conspiracy theory`.

“All over the world, elite institutions from governments to media to academia are losing their authority and monopoly control of information to dynamic amateurs and the broader public.” --Marc Andreessen

This coordinated attack against facebook is merely the mechanism through which they are trying to reassert control over the flow of information. It's the justification to create a new federal agency with gatekeeping powers over the internet: https://twitter.com/gillibrandny/status/1445451624005001217

Is there any doubt this agency, The Ministry of Truth let's say, would have flagged `Iraq does not have weapons of mass destruction` as misinformation in 2003? Or `masks do work` in March 2020? We're not far from this as it is. Indeed, facebook was removing counter narratives with regard to the origin of Covid-19, which it only reversed when it became untenable: https://www.politico.com/news/2021/05/26/facebook-ban-covid-...

Re: Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

#245

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

jancsika wrote: post #210
breadzeppelin__ wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To go a bit further MSM's ad revenue is being hollowed out by Facebook et al. Why would anyone pay to advertise in Economist when they can advertise to "people interested in economics, earning over 150k, last thought about cigarettes three weeks ago" etc. Similarly, if you were an advertising exec at pfizer, would you choose to pay millions of dollars to advertise your meds to a continuously shrinking audience on som…

> Why would anyone pay to advertise in Economist when they can advertise to "people interested in economics, earning over 150k, last thought about cigarettes three weeks ago" etc. Isn't the economist subscription-based? Regardless, I'll bite: Isn't an important reason because someone wants to signal to the world that "everyone knows" their company is a sexy, category-defining beast? E.g., there are Coca Cola machines…

That’s fairly standard “brand-building.” Ever notice how, when a new movie or album is about to drop, you start seeing tabloid stories, featuring the stars?

On the one hand, it can be argued that “people are interested, because of the movie.”

Except the stories usually start long before any “official” advertisements appear.

It’s about “building buzz,” and the American advertising industry (they refer to themselves as “communications”) is the best in the world, for this kind of thing.

The term “dog whistle” is used in a derogatory manner, but it’s actually a fairly apt metaphor. Dogs won’t respond to the whistle (which they hear just fine), unless they have been trained. "Building buzz" is training, so the paid ads will be much more effective. It works very well.

Re: Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

#246

Post by hunterb123 »

enumjorge wrote: post #240
hunterb123 wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't seen any calls from any Republicans to censor any speech. Their base is very adamant about the Bill of Rights. Do you have any examples to back up your statement? Keep in mind we're talking about silencing political dissent, that's pretty fucking major, not a "oh both sides do it, that's life" thing.

> Their base is very adamant about the Bill of Rights. Bullshit. A lot of their base is adamant about quoting the bill of rights when it serves them and looking the other way when it doesn't. Highly doubt most of them can even list all the amendments of the bill of rights they claim to be so passionate about. There's amendments in there about due process, yet you'll see the right defend cops using excessive force on…

Alright, find something recent. We're talking about current censorship. No amount of whataboutism will make what the Dems are currently doing ok.

As a libertarian in the wing I know full well about the past of the evangelicals, doesn't make censorship okay does it?

Re: Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

#248

Post by whatshisface »

mkr-hn wrote: post #112
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> most of them don’t give a shit about the reputation of FB This is close to a straw man argument. Nobody claims users will abandon Facebook. The article posits, instead, strengthening headwinds. Headwinds in hiring (there is already a double-digit premium Facebook must pay for talent). From recurring whistleblowing, and its impact on morale and productivity. Headwinds in projects and partnerships, like Libre/Diem be…

It's been so long since a company reached Facebook's heights and fell that a whole generation doesn't know what it looks like. AOL was the Facebook of its time: a joke to system admins, a default ban on small game servers and IRC channels. Meanwhile, most people had no idea anyone had a problem with AOL. Like with Facebook, there were people reporting on its follies like Observers.net[0], but it mostly went unremarke…

Everyone keeps leaving Instagram out of the discussion. I wonder why?

Re: Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

#249

Post by danans »

shoto_io wrote: post #3

No. That’s what people like us and all the main stream media hope for. But: most people I know don’t have the slightest clue that Insta and WhatsApp belong to the FB group. And even worse: most of them don’t give a shit about the reputation of FB. They just want to send messages and share pictures through those apps.

> And even worse: most of them don’t give a shit about the reputation of FB. They just want to send messages and share pictures through those apps.

Group messaging and engagement algorithm amplified social media are different things though.

Group messaging like WhatsApp, iMessage, and SMS, and photo sharing like Google photos or iPhoto have an inherently limited distribution of a given piece of content. It's not that you can't do nefarious things using these products, it's just harder to scale those.

Engagement amplified social media, as found in varying degrees on Facebook, TikTok Instagram, YouTube, etc, have far more potential to move society as a whole - for better or for worse.

Therefore it's not unreasonable for people to continue to use something like WhatsApp for limited group conversations while refusing to use Facebook or similar products due to the increased risk of exposure to harmful content.

One is free to despise any product Facebook or any company creates just because they are Facebook, but that's a whole different discussion.

Re: Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

#250

Post by [deleted] »

shoto_io wrote: post #3

No. That’s what people like us and all the main stream media hope for. But: most people I know don’t have the slightest clue that Insta and WhatsApp belong to the FB group. And even worse: most of them don’t give a shit about the reputation of FB. They just want to send messages and share pictures through those apps.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN