Ousted propaganda scholar accuses Harvard of bowing to Meta • Hacker News Board

Re: Ousted propaganda scholar accuses Harvard of bowing to Meta

#291

Post by kevinventullo » Mon, Dec 04, 2023, 6:29 PM UTC

CobrastanJorji wrote: post #269

Animats wrote: post #265

Harvard's top management seems to be caving in to donors a lot lately.[1][2] Those were over the Israel/Palestine war. Now it's over Facebook. [1] https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/06/business/harvard-antisemitism... [2] https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/02/business/law-firms-antisemiti...

You know, donating money to Harvard is weird. They've got a $50 billion endowment. They have enough money to do anything they want. What good would donations do in the first place? And yet, Harvard receives something like $500 million per year in donations. Why?

Might make more sense to think of it less as a donation and more as buying fuzzy influence.

Re: Ousted propaganda scholar accuses Harvard of bowing to Meta

#292

Post by mjhay » Mon, Dec 04, 2023, 6:29 PM UTC

cporios wrote: post #268

macksd wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think sidelining the lead researcher and giving the project to another group is accurately described at "gutting a team". No, they didn't end the project, but the series of events described seems to be insinuating that she could have led the project if she was willing to have her work funded by Facebook, listen to one of their former people, etc. So if that was their goal, and they just got someone else to do the w…

Noting that the project and all its documents are publicly accessible to anyone at https://fbarchive.org/ .

But further work from the same leadership has been discontinued...

Re: Ousted propaganda scholar accuses Harvard of bowing to Meta

#293

Post by dylan604 » Mon, Dec 04, 2023, 6:30 PM UTC

legutierr wrote: post #270

Somehow the human brain by default conflates the concepts of "being prestigious" and "having integrity". It's difficult to fight this cognitive bias that, I think, we all carry—but we must.

i must be an outlier to this default. there has been enough evidence over the years that the ivy league schools are just as shady as any other school. they just have more money to make hiding things easier. with as many laps around the sun as i have now, i'm just super suspect of pretty much anything at this point.

Re: Ousted propaganda scholar accuses Harvard of bowing to Meta

#294

Post by Simon_ORourke » Mon, Dec 04, 2023, 6:30 PM UTC

abeppu wrote: post #243

Setting aside the institutional failures within Harvard, shouldn't this also pose legal problems for the Chan Zuckerberg Foundation? I am certainly not a lawyer, but I thought the tax-benefits of a non-profit were supposed to be tied to some governance requirements and operating in pursuit of some mission other than profit. If when the Chan Zuckerberg foundation gives a donation to a school, an exec from Meta is then…

It's deeply dirty, in a sort of teflon get-away-with-anything way. Of course Harvard needs money to run, and has in the past accepted all manner of dubious donors, but implicitly receiving a payment quid pro quo to kill research is pretty low.

Re: Ousted propaganda scholar accuses Harvard of bowing to Meta

#295

Post by bko » Mon, Dec 04, 2023, 6:30 PM UTC

_aavaa_ wrote: post #178

bko wrote: post #151

Maybe as an aside, but why should this research be done at university level? Is it expensive or require their resources? Obviously institutions are at risk of capture by special interests. We can call them non profit but doesn't stop the economics and human nature. Same is true for politicians so oversight could make things even worse as it would be even more centralized and easier to capture . So we should look for…

> why should this research be done at university level? I think this questions is backwards. This seems very much in line with other research already done at universities. > So we should look for smaller individuals and groups to conduct research. Smaller individual and groups can be much more easily sued. It's much easier to spin a story about suing some rogue partisan non-profit than it is for suing academic resear…

You didn't answer my question. Why should it be done at universities? I get that stuff like it is already done there, but why?

Short selling has a long history. Obv people don't like them but don't know any successful lawsuits. Prob a lot easier and cheaper to capture a uni than sue some short seller.

Re: Ousted propaganda scholar accuses Harvard of bowing to Meta

#296

Post by qaq » Mon, Dec 04, 2023, 6:31 PM UTC

Animats wrote: post #265

Harvard's top management seems to be caving in to donors a lot lately.[1][2] Those were over the Israel/Palestine war. Now it's over Facebook. [1] https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/06/business/harvard-antisemitism... [2] https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/02/business/law-firms-antisemiti...

[flagged]

Re: Ousted propaganda scholar accuses Harvard of bowing to Meta

#297

Post by Vegenoid » Mon, Dec 04, 2023, 6:32 PM UTC

CobrastanJorji wrote: post #269

Animats wrote: post #265

Harvard's top management seems to be caving in to donors a lot lately.[1][2] Those were over the Israel/Palestine war. Now it's over Facebook. [1] https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/06/business/harvard-antisemitism... [2] https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/02/business/law-firms-antisemiti...

You know, donating money to Harvard is weird. They've got a $50 billion endowment. They have enough money to do anything they want. What good would donations do in the first place? And yet, Harvard receives something like $500 million per year in donations. Why?

One reason (as indicated by these events) is to gain influence with the administration of one of the most influential universities in the world.

Re: Ousted propaganda scholar accuses Harvard of bowing to Meta

#298

Post by u32480932048 » Mon, Dec 04, 2023, 6:32 PM UTC

akaij wrote: post #218

chernevik wrote: post #184

Doesn't matter even if true. Anyone wanting to be taken seriously on "disinformation" would get as far away as possible from a place like Harvard in the first place.

I don't even understand what you mean. Care to elaborate?

The epitome of hegemony and privilege can't credibly act as an arbiter of truth, particularly in the current milieu, where it's simultaneously a bastion of The Oppressors™ and The Colonists™ as well as one of those liberal colleges indoctrinating The Children with Communism™ and/or Socialism™.

In short, few people actually care what Harvard has to say because it's popularly perceived as a mouthpiece for The Establishment.

Re: Ousted propaganda scholar accuses Harvard of bowing to Meta

#299

Post by CodeWriter23 » Mon, Dec 04, 2023, 6:33 PM UTC

tuwtuwtuwtuw wrote: post #221

TeeMassive wrote: post #191

"prestigious team of online disinformation experts" Not being the devil's advocate here, but "online disinformation" is not a credentialed field. That's like calling yourself a "truth expert". Also the prestigious part is bogus at best. If they are then they sure don't make the headlines often.

I'm not following your reasoning here. There are people working with the topic that is online disinformation. I know Swedish government have some teams who analyze disinformation campaigns, as an example. Are you saying that people who work with this area cannot be experts on the area?

I can't speak for the OP but take into the current Media Matters "outing" of X over the ad placement next to anti-semitic content.

Basically Media Matters juiced the X algorithm to give them less than 10 impressions of big ad spend clients ads next to anti-semitic comments they entered on their own sock puppet accounts (with few or little followers), then passed that contrivance off as truth, stating brand-destroying anti-semitic content is rampant on X. Where are the disinformation experts now decrying MM's bullshit? Where will they be in 30-36 months after X sues MM into oblivion? Hint: likely silent at their desks. Just as they have been over numerous lies targeting non-liberal narrative-busting realities.

Re: Ousted propaganda scholar accuses Harvard of bowing to Meta

#300

Post by wharvle » Mon, Dec 04, 2023, 6:35 PM UTC

kevinventullo wrote: post #291

CobrastanJorji wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know, donating money to Harvard is weird. They've got a $50 billion endowment. They have enough money to do anything they want. What good would donations do in the first place? And yet, Harvard receives something like $500 million per year in donations. Why?

Might make more sense to think of it less as a donation and more as buying fuzzy influence.

This makes more sense when one recalls that a whole lot of powerful people, including and perhaps especially politicians, come from a handful of prestigious schools, and are surrounded by advisors and assistants largely from those same schools.

[edit] and of course the real rabbit hole is private prep schools. Good luck becoming president in this century without attending one. Wonder what their donor lists look like.