Frankly, the world would be a much better, safer place without Facebook in it.
Facebook’s Political Unit Enables Propaganda
151–160 of 271 posts
Re: Facebook’s Political Unit Enables Propaganda
#152Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imagine... If somebody like Rush Limbaugh had a nationwide radio show where day by day he created content based on RNC talking points. Or a network like Fox or MSNBC went all in on party loyalty and based all their content on party talking points. Or a media conglomerate like Sinclair or Clear Channel pushed out political messaging to their affiliates in small markets that had to be aired during prime viewership. oh…
The goal in for-profit communication is always going to be the same: getting return visits. The best way to do that is to tell people what they want to hear. This is why Rush and Fox and MSNBC and Breitbart have the content they have. This is also what Facebook is doing. However, since they have the advantage of being able to complete personalize your feed to give you what you want, they can provide 100% coverage acr…
>The best way to do that is to tell people what they want to hear.
It's about providing validation and reassurance.
Which doesn't always require telling people what they want to hear, but it certainly helps.
Rush and Fox and Breitbart exist because there is a need -- millions of people who are seeking emotional validation that their worldviews are correct.
It's the same reason left-leaning publications exist. Emotional validation disguised as news.
Re: Facebook’s Political Unit Enables Propaganda
#153Earlier quoted context omitted.
The writers for most prime-time sitcoms are Democrats. They do it for free.
I’ve always suspected that the reason underwood is a democrat in house of cards is solely to deflect this very criticism.
or it could be because the character is based on bill clinton
Re: Facebook’s Political Unit Enables Propaganda
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
This article? https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/12/the-cri... In no way, shape or form does that "bemoan" efforts to fight _serious_ crime in changing neighborhoods. It DOES take into account the impact of gentrification on the less affluent residents. Is actually discussing that impact considered "liberal"? If you want to criticize liberalism honestly, then you probably shouldn't grossly mischaracter…
Yes, that one. I stand by my criticism, and I accuse you of the very thing that you are accusing me of. If you want me to go in depth, I will. If anything, I restrained myself in addressing that asinine article. It opens with: >"But having been marred by gang violence in recent years, this J’ouvert was markedly different, as The New York Times described. The event, which derives its name from a Creole term for “daybr…
It seems like a simplistic explanation, but I wonder if some people simply forget or overlook how multidimensional and complicated life is when discussing such matters. It is extremely common when reading political discussions, even among intelligent people, to see opinions with absolute certainty on matters they know very little about. It's easy for "smart" people to see this in (let's be honest) dumb people, but very few can see it in themselves, or others sharing their political stripes.
EDIT: Wow, I didn't even criticize one side or the other, but simply pointed out a fact of human nature, and here we go with the downvotes as usual. Another excellent illustration of the "either you're with us or against us" philosophy. At least people can agree with ole George on one thing.
Re: Facebook’s Political Unit Enables Propaganda
#155Earlier quoted context omitted.
Come now, Zuckerberg doesn't even need public office. He's more powerful where he is now than he could ever be in an elected position. Just based on the information in the article, he could offer technical embeds to campaigns he likes and ignore the ones he doesn't, or provide them with a much smaller degree of assistance, with no one the wiser. I don't think there's a single person in the world with as much potentia…
Then why is he going on his "I'm running for President" tour of America, eating at blue collar family homes and visiting historically black churches? Being in governance gives you power that you can only glance at as a private citizen. Being a billionaire and president of the US will make you far more powerful than merely being a billionaire.
it's hard to imagine that he believes he stands a chance. i'm sure any worthwhile consultant or polysci adviser could let him down gently.
Re: Facebook’s Political Unit Enables Propaganda
#156The founding fathers were smarter than all of you, they just allowed free speech and let anybody say whatever they want. You can discuss it until tomorrow but that's the only viable solution which proved itself again and again. Facebook should let people say whatever they want and let the public be the judge. I don't need anybody to tell me how to consume my news.
Re: Facebook’s Political Unit Enables Propaganda
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fox News is following its viewers’ sentiment; it originally favored anti-Trump stories prior to his nomination by the Republican Party. Now it pushes the Trump line, but this is due to the fact that Fox News rightly recognizes that its viewers want their biases confirmed.
As does CNBC and CNN, admittedly to a far lesser degree, except theirs is the "correct" bias.
I understand what kind of people dominate here, specially considering the moderators deleting any comment that has the "wrong" opinion, but "lesser degree"?
They have been outright lying to push one party agenda. Remember this?: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=15ZTiAf8fp8
EDIT: I understand that I have been shadow-banned here but I hope these comments will be read thousands of years from now by historians and be content by the fact that not all of the people of our generation were complete fagtards like the mods here.
Re: Facebook’s Political Unit Enables Propaganda
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not all of these protests or nationalism were organic, they were engineered by Russia. ex) Brexit There is increasing number of evidence that points to the ex-KGB officer now leading a nuclear armed 2.5 world country. If they can pull one on the US, the rest of Eastern Europe, or frankly any country facing an authoritarian government will face this new 'hybrid war'--combining cyberattacks, psy-ops on social media and…
> Not all of these protests or nationalism were organic, they were engineered by Russia. ex) Brexit Nothing scares me more than unfalsifiable claims like this. "The vote didn't go my way, so it must have been illegitimate. If only people weren't entranced by Russian propaganda! My side would have won!" Truly disgusting. We're already seeing justifications for limiting speech. This is a very dark road we're going down…
There is overwhelming evidence that is rejected by Trump supporters:
https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/941120497823215616
https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/941376110381731841
I suggest you to read the facts and decide for yourself. I'm sure HNers are more than capable of connecting the dots.
Re: Facebook’s Political Unit Enables Propaganda
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
When the Iraq WMD situation unfolded, it was met with plenty of skepticism. “MSM” gave it air time, but it was overcome by the deception of the administration at the time, e.g., Sec. Powell’s statements and the cherry-picked CIA assessment. Your example actually undermines your argument. If anything, we need honest actors around to poke holes in narratives produced by authorities, not ones with the goal of weakening…
I think his point was, if it happened now, any skepticism would be immediately dismissed as Russian trolls, as it is not consistent with the "correct" mainstream narrative. I see this happening frequently even where there is zero motive for Russians to be involved, but it is no less effective as we've let the authorities do our thinking for us for so long.
Things are different the closer to Russia a country is (like Romania, from where I'm from). The thing with the fake FB accounts only showing "nice girls" as profile photos is all too real, I think I've reported 2 or 3 of them directly to FB, nothing happened, at which point I started calling them out as shill accounts directly. It's interesting seeing Russian propaganda in action. For Romania they have a website called sputnik.md which apparently is centered on Republic of Moldova's domestic issues, but every couple of days or so they have an article on Romania whose exact ideas then get regurgitated by some of the Romanian corrupt politicians or by the local corrupt media supporting them another couple of days later.
> I see this happening frequently even where there is zero motive for Russians to be involved, but it is no less effective as we've let the authorities do our thinking for us for so long.
Everybody gets involved, everybody, because it's so easy and relatively cheap and because the stakes are so high (controlling the public discourse, world-wide). It's just that at the moment the Russians are better at this internet-influencing game compared to the Americans and their allies (imho the Israelis are the best, but they only get involved when there's talk about Gaza and the West Bank). I guess this is payback for Radio Free Europe and Radio Voice of America, when the US used to have the upper hand.
Re: Facebook’s Political Unit Enables Propaganda
#160Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've read the "journalists lean left, owners lean right" mantra many, many of times over the last 10 years on various boards, yet the overwhelming majority of network news and shows, cable news and entertainment shows dump on Republicans/Conservatism and fawn over Democrats/Liberalism. IMO, it's a very misleading idea meant to deceive people into thinking their sources of news or entertainment are somehow more honest…
You're mistaking "Republicans are right now a steaming heap of awful" with "News and shows are left-leaning". I'm a huge fan of having a principled, Conservative, political group. They are there to help provide measured, sane, grounding and represent the status-quo in opposition to those who would change it. That's actually a good thing for Progressives - it helps test the ideas, to forge them into concrete and relia…
It's not very hard to see that "Republicans" are a very diverse bunch... which is very much unlike the left, where if you don't keep up with their latest "progressive" ideas and fail to parrot them verbatim, you're excluded from the group... so anyone on the left not able to grasp the diversity of ideas within Republicans is actually understandable. However, I encourage you to at least consider the idea that "Republicans" are composed of people who vastly disagree on almost everything on various levels... which is kind of what you'd expect anywhere where free thinking is encouraged. When people think for themselves, since people have different experiences, they end up caring about and prioritizing different things and even disagreeing with each other. Compare that to masses being brainwashed using propaganda where everyone "happens" to think the same and agree on everything... until something changes and everyone happens to change at the same time.
Here is something that might help: https://youtu.be/EXs879mUu4o