Unmasking the most viral page on Facebook

Post by Traster » Mon, Nov 22, 2021, 10:49 PM UTC

mitchdoogle wrote: post #45

Traster wrote: post #28

I can't help but think it's not a coincidence that Facebook decides to produce a content report that lists the top 20 most viewed items and it just so happens that the top 20 items are inexplicably spam. Either facebook is enitrely dominated by spam (possible) or facebook figured out they could just boost a few items to make sure anything embarassing doens't make the short list.

The purpose of this report is to show widely-viewed content. Maybe the embarrassing stuff is not as widely-viewed as you imagine.

Post by aierou » Mon, Nov 22, 2021, 10:52 PM UTC

dan-robertson wrote: post #81

Marvin_Martian wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its more that people are shocked* that facebook communicated to the outside that such problems were nonexistent, despite knowing that this was a lie. *not sure wether shocked is the right term to begin with, it seemed more like indignation to me.

Did they actually know it was a lie? E.g. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/10/opinion/instagram-faceboo...

Post by netizen-936824 » Mon, Nov 22, 2021, 10:54 PM UTC

addingnumbers wrote: post #84

MrAwesome wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ex-FB here. My guess is that it's primarily a combination of two factors: 1) Someone / some org was slow to notice that this was happening. 2) Bureaucratic muck slowed resolution down. Even once escalated, there would be a lot of red tape to go through to make the necessary changes to how things are ranked. The people noticing the problem most likely aren't the people able to make changes, the changes would need to b…

> Even once escalated, there would be a lot of red tape to go through to make the necessary changes to how things are ranked. When I write a program that accidentally gradually fills a disk with garbage, I don't wait until I can redesign the program before I delete the garbage.

Post by jmchuster » Mon, Nov 22, 2021, 11:01 PM UTC

MauranKilom wrote: post #83

MrAwesome wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ex-FB here. My guess is that it's primarily a combination of two factors: 1) Someone / some org was slow to notice that this was happening. 2) Bureaucratic muck slowed resolution down. Even once escalated, there would be a lot of red tape to go through to make the necessary changes to how things are ranked. The people noticing the problem most likely aren't the people able to make changes, the changes would need to b…

Ok, but all that must also be true for the change that originally created this situation. There's all this red tape and large-scale testing and then... nobody actually looks at what hits the #1 spot?

Post by beebmam » Mon, Nov 22, 2021, 11:20 PM UTC

MrAwesome wrote: post #71

snowwrestler wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every reply so far has missed the point of this sentence, so here it is: Facebook reporting accurately is sane, but Facebook is in charge of what is being reported, which is not sane. Like, imagine if your friend was slowly poisoning himself by flavoring his food with lead for a month. Even if he is honest with you about what he’s been doing, it’s still not a sane situation. If anything it’s less sane to be seemingly…

Ex-FB here. My guess is that it's primarily a combination of two factors: 1) Someone / some org was slow to notice that this was happening. 2) Bureaucratic muck slowed resolution down. Even once escalated, there would be a lot of red tape to go through to make the necessary changes to how things are ranked. The people noticing the problem most likely aren't the people able to make changes, the changes would need to b…