Every other day, my feed seems to be filled with pro-Republican posts, followed by pro-Democratic posts the next. It’s fascinating how the model decided this was the kind of content worth generating.
Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta
181–190 of 381 posts
Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta
#182> "it is not Meta's role to police offensiveness" Just to fund, transmit, amplify, protect, and profit from it.
[flagged]
Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta
#183Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta
#184Earlier quoted context omitted.
Zuck was gagging for the Trump 2nd term so he could go all in on this shit. Slow clap for the Meta employees that enable it.
[flagged]
Terrible take. Trying to moral gymnastics your way out of taking responsibility for who you work for. If you're working at meta it's unlikely to be your only good option. Yes, the janitors get a pass.
Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta
#185> "it is not Meta's role to police offensiveness" Just to fund, transmit, amplify, protect, and profit from it.
[flagged]
I quote myself 2 years ago, forgive me if I’m stating the obvious:
I'm going to set up two axioms to arrive at an extrapolated conclusion.
One: Human psychology tends to ascribe more weight to negative things than positive things in the short term. In the long term this generally balances out, but in the short term it's more prudent in a biological sense to pay attention to the rustling in the bushes than the berries you might pick from them. This is known as the [negativity bias](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negativity_bias).
Two: The modern gatekeepers of social interaction, Big Tech, employ blind algorithms that attempt to steer your attention towards spending more time on their platforms. These companies are the arbiters of the content we experience daily and what you do and don't see is mostly at their discretion. The techniques they employ, in simple terms, are designed to provoke what they call 'engagement'. They do this because at the end of the day FAANG have not only a financial interest, but a fiduciary duty to sell advertisements at the behest of their shareholders. The more they can engage you, the more ads they can sell. They employ live A-B testing, divide people into cohorts and poke and prod them with psychological techniques to try and glue your eyeballs to their ads.
Extrapolated conclusion: These companies have a financial and legally binding interest to divide the population against itself, obstructing politics and social interaction to the point where we might not be able to achieve any of the goals that we need to reach to prevent oblivion.
Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta
#186Earlier quoted context omitted.
Zuck was gagging for the Trump 2nd term so he could go all in on this shit. Slow clap for the Meta employees that enable it.
[flagged]
> Even if its an engineer that's making 6 figures that you are liekly alluding to, do you expect everyone to agree with your moral code and quit their job?
No, but you shouldn't expect to see them addressed with respect either, just like Enron traders, Purdue salesmen or tobacco scientists don't get a lot of it.
Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta
#187> "it is not Meta's role to police offensiveness" Just to fund, transmit, amplify, protect, and profit from it.
[flagged]
> Zuckerberg has a fiduciary responsibility to optimize shareholder value
Is that true?
And if it is true, he controls 60% of the voting power because he owns class B shares that get 10 votes each. Do you think he will sue himself if he fails to wring every last dollar out of Meta?
Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta
#188Why anyone still engages with these platforms is totally beyond me. They are bad for your soul, bad for the nation, bad for the world.
I'm not sure if you're talking about Meta platforms or social media in general. It's been years since I've used any Meta platform but I'm a daily user of Tiktok.
On Tiktok I don't think the platform is paying people to rage bait, at least not directly. But wannabe influencers will still try and rage bait their way into a viral video and hopefully a following. To me it's entirely transparent and I just move on but people fall for it. Lots of people. Gender wars is easy pickings. A good example was the $3 cheese surcharge on a burger. I knew immediately that was fake and it was later confirmed [1].
But why am I on Tiktok? Because there's actually some good stuff on there and just some plain entertaining stuff. But what really seals it is the comments. Therea re a ton of videos where the comments are the best part. There are some funny people out there. And Tiktok more than any other platform I've experienced seems to surface such comments.
But I could best describe Facebook as your racist uncle posting conspiracy theories and that's pretty much it.
[1]: https://www.bonappetit.com/story/tiktok-3-dollar-burger-chee...
Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta
#189Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta
#190Earlier quoted context omitted.
The egregious part is the amplification part. Profit derives from that. Transmission and protection are neutral and they are necessary for all information especially if there is a history of freedom of expression; though of course some governments and others like regulating permissible expression.
Don't forget the politics too behind it: - Facebook and Genocide: How Facebook contributed to genocide in Myanmar and why it will not be held accountable - https://systemicjustice.org/article/facebook-and-genocide-ho... - UN: Facebook had a ‘role’ in Rohingya genocide - https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/3/13/un-facebook-had-a-r... - Rohingya refugees sue Facebook over genocide - https://www.dw.com/en/rohingya-refug…