Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook’s 2016 Election Team Gave Advertisers a Blueprint to a Divided US

buzzfeed.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 44 posts

Re: Facebook’s 2016 Election Team Gave Advertisers a Blueprint to a Divided US

#21

Post by sudojudo »

inopinatus wrote: post #8

Neal Stephenson's Interface (1994) has never been more relevant. "The corresponding item on the list was highlighted, a bright purple box drawn over it so that the user could see which category he was dealing with at the moment. The hundred categories and names on the list were as follows: IRRELEVANT MOUTH BREATHER 400-POUND TAB DRINKER STONE-FACED URBAN HOMEBOY BURGER-FLIPPING HISTORY MAJOR SQUIRRELLY WINNEBAGO JOCK…

Yikes, one of those categories is not like the others. Seeing that you're an Aussie, you might not be aware, but folks in the US will instantly spot a nasty racial slur in your list.

Because your personal and professional info is associated with this account, you should probably edit the end off the bible-slinging line.

As a favor to you, I'm going to flag the comment.

Re: Facebook’s 2016 Election Team Gave Advertisers a Blueprint to a Divided US

#22

Post by jskopek »

sudojudo wrote: post #21
inopinatus wrote: post #8

Neal Stephenson's Interface (1994) has never been more relevant. "The corresponding item on the list was highlighted, a bright purple box drawn over it so that the user could see which category he was dealing with at the moment. The hundred categories and names on the list were as follows: IRRELEVANT MOUTH BREATHER 400-POUND TAB DRINKER STONE-FACED URBAN HOMEBOY BURGER-FLIPPING HISTORY MAJOR SQUIRRELLY WINNEBAGO JOCK…

Yikes, one of those categories is not like the others. Seeing that you're an Aussie, you might not be aware, but folks in the US will instantly spot a nasty racial slur in your list. Because your personal and professional info is associated with this account, you should probably edit the end off the bible-slinging line. As a favor to you, I'm going to flag the comment.

Wise of you to bring that up, but I feel you might be overplaying the slight. It's a direct quote from a book, so I'd be more angry at the author in this case. Still, good thing to point out.

Re: Facebook’s 2016 Election Team Gave Advertisers a Blueprint to a Divided US

#23

Post by intended »

jparse wrote: post #4

All in all, this is why there is no dislike button. The entire Facebook system incentivizes division because division creates revenue. It's a perpetual loop. Let's walk through how it works: Step 1) A person posts, or shares, something incredibly divisive. Note: There is no feedback button to let the poster know the content is hateful and that broader society disapproves of it. There is also no consequence to posting…

I disagree - reddit has a downvote button and it has zero Impact on the outcome.

This isn’t Facebook making this happen.

This is human beings being human beings in an alien environment exposing the difference between their stated preferences and unstated preferences.

It happened with forums, it likely happened with geocities.

You don’t need a like or dislike button, you just need the internet and text.

Anti Semitic forums were attacking Jewish forums before Facebook even showed up.

Facebook is just absorbing the entire internet in that all the “forums” are now just groups on Facebook. So it owns all the ad revenue everywhere - as long as people stay on Facebook.

But there’s no special incentive for divisiveness - that’s just what happens when people interact in a feature deficient, always on, text first, persistent environment.

Re: Facebook’s 2016 Election Team Gave Advertisers a Blueprint to a Divided US

#24

Post by jparse »

intended wrote: post #23
jparse wrote: post #4

All in all, this is why there is no dislike button. The entire Facebook system incentivizes division because division creates revenue. It's a perpetual loop. Let's walk through how it works: Step 1) A person posts, or shares, something incredibly divisive. Note: There is no feedback button to let the poster know the content is hateful and that broader society disapproves of it. There is also no consequence to posting…

I disagree - reddit has a downvote button and it has zero Impact on the outcome. This isn’t Facebook making this happen. This is human beings being human beings in an alien environment exposing the difference between their stated preferences and unstated preferences. It happened with forums, it likely happened with geocities. You don’t need a like or dislike button, you just need the internet and text. Anti Semitic f…

Reddit is a different beast. It is confined to a sub-reddit and the people who judge it are the people who are part of that sub-reddit. Mods included.

Also, reddit doesn't spread the content if there is any uptick. It is all pretty confined. Facebook does the exact reverse. It goes out of its way to spread the content that is driving engagement.

Re: Facebook’s 2016 Election Team Gave Advertisers a Blueprint to a Divided US

#25

Post by [deleted] »

jskopek wrote: post #22
sudojudo wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yikes, one of those categories is not like the others. Seeing that you're an Aussie, you might not be aware, but folks in the US will instantly spot a nasty racial slur in your list. Because your personal and professional info is associated with this account, you should probably edit the end off the bible-slinging line. As a favor to you, I'm going to flag the comment.

Wise of you to bring that up, but I feel you might be overplaying the slight. It's a direct quote from a book, so I'd be more angry at the author in this case. Still, good thing to point out.

[deleted]

Re: Facebook’s 2016 Election Team Gave Advertisers a Blueprint to a Divided US

#26

Post by inopinatus »

sudojudo wrote: post #21
inopinatus wrote: post #8

Neal Stephenson's Interface (1994) has never been more relevant. "The corresponding item on the list was highlighted, a bright purple box drawn over it so that the user could see which category he was dealing with at the moment. The hundred categories and names on the list were as follows: IRRELEVANT MOUTH BREATHER 400-POUND TAB DRINKER STONE-FACED URBAN HOMEBOY BURGER-FLIPPING HISTORY MAJOR SQUIRRELLY WINNEBAGO JOCK…

Yikes, one of those categories is not like the others. Seeing that you're an Aussie, you might not be aware, but folks in the US will instantly spot a nasty racial slur in your list. Because your personal and professional info is associated with this account, you should probably edit the end off the bible-slinging line. As a favor to you, I'm going to flag the comment.

Upvoted - not because I agree (I would never knowingly misquote a novel) - but because you're being downvoted and I'll defend your right to point out how horrible it is. And it is horrible.

Interface is a satire on the political process, and portrays data-driven political operatives as the most contemptible and cynical manipulators. The casual prejudice of pigeonholing everyone does them (and their real-world counterparts) no favours.

And race and class and privilege are distinguishing characteristics of the segments in the Facebook chart.

Re: Facebook’s 2016 Election Team Gave Advertisers a Blueprint to a Divided US

#27

Post by Animats »

This idea goes back a long way. See "The 480", from 1964.[1] Karl Rove got his start doing such analysis. There's a famous picture of young Rove with a reel of computer tape. Such data used to be used to target direct mail and phone calls. It didn't help with TV and newspapers, though, and they were more important.

The difference this time is that Facebook now has a big fraction of the news business. Now this stuff has real traction.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_480

Re: Facebook’s 2016 Election Team Gave Advertisers a Blueprint to a Divided US

#28

Post by tanilama »

thisisit wrote: post #13

I remember reading about Obama's election and the use of "big data" and "data science" to target voters: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/509026/how-obamas-team-us... The social media companies picked on that and ran with it. So, while Facebook is not exactly the paragon of ethical behavior, this is just fodder for click bait. If the same targeting had worked in someone's favor the article would have been "gave adv…

Guess that backfires.

Re: Facebook’s 2016 Election Team Gave Advertisers a Blueprint to a Divided US

#29

Post by tanilama »

sogen wrote: post #18
thisisit wrote: post #13

I remember reading about Obama's election and the use of "big data" and "data science" to target voters: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/509026/how-obamas-team-us... The social media companies picked on that and ran with it. So, while Facebook is not exactly the paragon of ethical behavior, this is just fodder for click bait. If the same targeting had worked in someone's favor the article would have been "gave adv…

Check Cambridge Analytica: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/16/15657512/...

They helped Tory in this summer GE in UK, and they failed miserably.

Re: Facebook’s 2016 Election Team Gave Advertisers a Blueprint to a Divided US

#30

Post by intended »

jparse wrote: post #24
intended wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree - reddit has a downvote button and it has zero Impact on the outcome. This isn’t Facebook making this happen. This is human beings being human beings in an alien environment exposing the difference between their stated preferences and unstated preferences. It happened with forums, it likely happened with geocities. You don’t need a like or dislike button, you just need the internet and text. Anti Semitic f…

Reddit is a different beast. It is confined to a sub-reddit and the people who judge it are the people who are part of that sub-reddit. Mods included. Also, reddit doesn't spread the content if there is any uptick. It is all pretty confined. Facebook does the exact reverse. It goes out of its way to spread the content that is driving engagement.

The thesis holds that a dislike button’s absence emboldens negative behavior.

This is not true, because if so Reddit’s and their subreddits would have a very different history.

And as another user pointed out, the research shows that a dislike button actually creates MORE engagement and content, not less.

My point is that this is the human mind on the internet; most human beings have no clue about how they work, what their hidden biases are, and what assumptions and fantasies they carry to deal with the world.

When those heuristics are treated to a system that assumes their best behavior, it will fail to our more regular, normal behavior.

Post reply on HN