Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta • Hacker News Board

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

#211

Post by mrguyorama » Wed, Aug 12, 2026, 2:04 PM UTC

mattlondon wrote: post #63

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.

No, Meta intentionally set up the incentive structure to reward rage bait content. You should expect they knew what they were going to get from doing that.

You don't get to be Meta's size and have Meta's experience with systems engineering and research on their own platform's incentives and outcomes, and not know exactly how this will go.

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

#212

Post by mikeocool » Wed, Aug 12, 2026, 2:05 PM UTC

jklinger410 wrote: post #153

mikeocool wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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

Oh, that’s good, because if you automate something then you’re automatically absolved from all responsibility for its actions.

And you certainly shouldn’t bother monitoring what it’s doing.

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

#213

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Aug 12, 2026, 2:05 PM UTC

JohnFen wrote: post #198

xutopia wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

That's a serious oversimplification. A CEO doesn't have any duty to maximize profit at all costs. "Shareholder value" includes quite a lot of things that aren't directly about that at all. Often, the way to optimize shareholder value is to pass on certain practices that may be technically profitable.

[deleted]

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

#214

Post by wpietri » Wed, Aug 12, 2026, 2:06 PM UTC

mc32 wrote: post #92

wpietri wrote: post #55

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

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.

Transmission and protection are not neutral. They're a choice. Facebook has freedom of association and is allowed not to host content they believe harmful. Something they already do extensively. [1]

[1] https://transparency.meta.com/policies/community-standards/

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

#215

Post by tomaytotomato » Wed, Aug 12, 2026, 2:06 PM UTC

I would drop Facebook in a heartbeat but Facebook Marketplace is a strong pull for getting bargains in my local area.

I have alternatives like eBay and Gumtree but they have their own shortcomings.

Examples from Facebook:

- Antique lumber planks 50p a plank

- 4 sticks of DDR4 16GB SODIMMs, £60

- Garden tools, £10

This stuff would be slower and more expensive on eBay, and Gumtree is more of a waiting game as its userbase has definitely shrunk.

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

#216

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Aug 12, 2026, 2:07 PM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #214

mc32 wrote: post #92

Earlier 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.

Transmission and protection are not neutral. They're a choice. Facebook has freedom of association and is allowed not to host content they believe harmful. Something they already do extensively. [1] [1] https://transparency.meta.com/policies/community-standards/

[deleted]

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

#217

Post by edgyquant » Wed, Aug 12, 2026, 2:07 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #196

asdvsadnvs wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> What if you are a cook or a plumber or a janitor at Meta who has no idea One, do better. Two, the vitriol is obviously aimed at Meta’s white-collar employees. (Anecdotally, it’s getting harder for them to date.)

“Anecdotally” this is not the case, it’s getting harder for everyone to date meta employees are not doing worse than anyone else and with their income likely the opposite

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

#218

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Aug 12, 2026, 2:08 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #195

xutopia wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> Zuckerberg has a fiduciary responsibility to optimize shareholder value “Shareholder value” is ambiguous for good reason. It defers to the Board’s judgement. Fiduciary responsibility doesn’t excuse this sort of incentivizing of crime.

[deleted]

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

#219

Post by eagerpace » Wed, Aug 12, 2026, 2:09 PM UTC

tomaytotomato wrote: post #215

I would drop Facebook in a heartbeat but Facebook Marketplace is a strong pull for getting bargains in my local area. I have alternatives like eBay and Gumtree but they have their own shortcomings. Examples from Facebook: - Antique lumber planks 50p a plank - 4 sticks of DDR4 16GB SODIMMs, £60 - Garden tools, £10 This stuff would be slower and more expensive on eBay, and Gumtree is more of a waiting game as its userb…

I have a dedicated profile for marketplace. I managed to keep it separate from my real meta account for a long time but they eventually tricked me into linking it. We need a Wikipedia model online marketplace. Craigslist was close, but didn’t keep up.

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

#220

Post by wpietri » Wed, Aug 12, 2026, 2:09 PM UTC

asdvsadnvs wrote: post #169

phatfish wrote: post #125

Earlier 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]

Everyone has the moral obligation to not enable or profit from harm. Do we all live up perfectly to that all the time? No. There's no meaningful moral rule where people can do that. If there were, it wouldn't be worth having as a moral rule.

Is Zuckerberg responsible for the harm he's causing? Yes. Are the workers enabling that responsible? Yes. Are the people who profit from indirectly supporting that responsible? Yes. Responsibility is not zero sum.