Live data from Hacker News

Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

abc.net.au

151–160 of 381 posts

Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

#151

I think this is a bit misleading. It sounds to me like the creators are creating and uploading the content, and then that is getting monetised on the platform? The title makes it sound like meta is commissioning the content? I don't think that is the case here? Or is it? Directly commissioning someone to create it is pretty wild.

They wrote that title specifically to mislead people.

Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

#152
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i recently downloaded it again after nearly a decade to use marketplace to buy a bike for my wife. Got the bike and deleted the app. but my god opening it up was hell. the interface on mobile is just....stressful. super cluttered, shit all over the place with notifications and things to see. first post i saw on there was someone i used to be friends with but havent thought about in years just blatently reposting ACTU…

My experience with Instagram too. Signed up to talk to one person who only uses Instagram, and it's just garbage all around. I think it's a frog boiling situation. Early users got gradually accustomed to the gradually increasing garbage, but anyone who enters the ecosystem now is immediately turned off.

at the very least, insta is a semi cleaner and its the content itself thats abrasive... for now... thats the only other thing i use purely to keep up with family and i do photography so its somewhere to share some pics with family and friends.once you spend an entire night flagging everything you dont wanna see it becomes pretty clean. and then i put a 15 min timer on top of it. so it barely gets used but its semi well-tailored lol

Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

#153

I think this is a bit misleading. It sounds to me like the creators are creating and uploading the content, and then that is getting monetised on the platform? The title makes it sound like meta is commissioning the content? I don't think that is the case here? Or is it? Directly commissioning someone to create it is pretty wild.

> appear to be profiting from is "an invitation-only programme that lets you earn money from the performance of your eligible public reels, photos, stories and text posts." The difference between “We ask white nationalists to join our invite only pay-for-views program” and “we commission white nationalists to make content” kinda seems like splitting hairs.

The invitation is automated

Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

#154
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i recently downloaded it again after nearly a decade to use marketplace to buy a bike for my wife. Got the bike and deleted the app. but my god opening it up was hell. the interface on mobile is just....stressful. super cluttered, shit all over the place with notifications and things to see. first post i saw on there was someone i used to be friends with but havent thought about in years just blatently reposting ACTU…

I refuse to use facebook on mobile. Website only, and it’s terrible but that’s where the local community is if you need to find a lost dog or deal on a bike.

yup and thats exactly what i discovered. id rather not use it and also not lose any additional respect for people i used to like or have good memories with lol

Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

#155
post #129
post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Unregulated media.” LOL.

Care to elaborate? You don’t think the creator of “You should self harm: the TV show” would’ve been regulated and held accountable for the detrimental consequences back in the day? Not saying it was perfect back then, but today I do think internet media companies are out of control.

We had “regulated media” before: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hays_Code. Do you trust people to regulate your media? I don’t.

Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

#156
post #69
post #68

Every single time historically we have unregulated media you get a shitshow. I think you can blame our societies nonchalant lassez faire attitude to the propaganda profiteering by American big tech for lots of the issues we face today. Honestly: do cocaine laced recommender algorithms really benefit us? I really hope the EU fully bans this stuff.

But regulated media is also a shit show!

You just need accountable media.

Torture or murder on a live Facebook stream? You hold Facebook accountable.

Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

#157
post #55

> "it is not Meta's role to police offensiveness" Just to fund, transmit, amplify, protect, and profit from it.

[flagged]

There’s a big difference between fiction when the viewer knows it’s make believe and when it’s presented as factual. Nobody is committing genocide because they saw a violent movie whereas Facebook shares responsibility for at least one recognized genocide and a number of smaller scale events where the company amplified hateful content and was very slow to take it down. A key distinction here is choice: I don’t accidentally start watching a slasher movie or listening to gangster rap, but Facebook / TikTok / X will ensure that I see unrequested content if it’s something their algorithms reward for “engagement” (i.e. it sells ads), it won’t be labeled, and they won’t let you reliably control it because they’d lose money if Facebook had a “only show my actual friends’ posts” default.

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/09/myanmar-faceb...

Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

#158
post #74

Why anyone still engages with these platforms is totally beyond me. They are bad for your soul, bad for the nation, bad for the world.

If I may offer: Because they have become fiendishly adept at exploiting an addictive behaviour/weakness in our brains WHILE masquerading as some sort of social utility (AND perhaps vestigially retaining some semblance of that) - which, incidentally, is what (some) originally might have been, before encrappification.-

Exactly. Same reason we eat junk food that also isnt good for us.
Post reply on HN