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

Mark Zuckerberg still doesn't get it

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 94 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg still doesn't get it

#31

Post by malvosenior »

peterhadlaw wrote: post #25
malvosenior wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All governments push propaganda. Russia's miniscule ad spend on FB had no measurable effect (please provide proof if you think this is wrong). Clinton and Trump spent many order of magnitude more on political advertising than any foreign nation and even that didn't assure their win. People aren't mindless robots, they vote for who they want to vote for.

The funniest thing is, no one talks about this, but if the "goal" was to sew discord... My goodness someone "in the Kremlin" should be getting a promotion for their exceptionally well done job. I mean how many YEARS and millions of dollars has the US wasted chasing after this ghost of Russian interference? If you want to calculate the ROI from a few thousand dollars to how much hysteria followed suit, it's insane. Th…

Correct, this never had anything to do with Russia and it has everything to do with Trump. The political and media establishment couldn't handle an outsider winning the presidency so it was they that have gone full blast on propaganda for the past 3 years.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg still doesn't get it

#32

Post by loceng »

malvosenior wrote: post #21
CydeWeys wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are being attacked with foreign propaganda by our long-term enemies. They are succeeding in destroying our position on the world stage. It's not something that can be turned a blind eye to under the guise of free speech (which it isn't).

All governments push propaganda. Russia's miniscule ad spend on FB had no measurable effect (please provide proof if you think this is wrong). Clinton and Trump spent many order of magnitude more on political advertising than any foreign nation and even that didn't assure their win. People aren't mindless robots, they vote for who they want to vote for.

"No measurable effect" is a weak argument - especially considering we're talking about it, and it massively influenced the narrative - amplified by the mainstream media, just like Trump used effectively.

"They vote for who they want to vote for" - you understand manipulation is a thing, right? And that people will believe lies, and that people are often irrational - and therefore when they "decide" who to vote for it might not be logical and based on whatever manipulative messaging, propaganda, they've heard over and over again?

Re: Mark Zuckerberg still doesn't get it

#33

Post by malvosenior »

jakelazaroff wrote: post #26
malvosenior wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They are using it as an excuse to protect the spread of disinformation. I really don't think so. They want usage, period. They don't want to actively spread disinformation. They probably find that editorializing and censoring information annoys users. There's been no proof whatsoever that Russia had any impact via FB on the 2016 election. Most people know this and reject larger narratives that push centralized mani…

> There's been no proof whatsoever that Russia had any impact via FB on the 2016 election. This is false. Facebook themselves announced that Russia spent $100,000 on ads aimed at U.S. voters. Posts from six Russian propaganda accounts were shared hundreds of millions of times. [1] Effort doesn't equal impact, I suppose, but there's no way of proving the latter and the former is still extremely disturbing. [1] https:/…

I don't find $100k ad spend on FB disturbing at all, that's not even minuscule. As we both said, there was no measurable impact. To put things in perspective Clinton raised $1.2B for her campaign. I find that much more disturbing than $100k spent on memes.

https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/graphics/2016-presidentia...

Re: Mark Zuckerberg still doesn't get it

#34

Post by chrischen »

CydeWeys wrote: post #17
cobweb2 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you not beginning to struggle with the contradictions of your political ideas? You want a central authority to ban the spread of "blatantly false" ideas that you fear may cause plebians to vote the wrong way, yet you support affording plebians with the full right to vote? Would it not be simpler to bans plebians from voting, and therefore remove your worry entirely that they may vote the wrong way when hearing "b…

We are being attacked with foreign propaganda by our long-term enemies. They are succeeding in destroying our position on the world stage. It's not something that can be turned a blind eye to under the guise of free speech (which it isn't).

You sound like the Chinese government.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg still doesn't get it

#35

Post by malvosenior »

loceng wrote: post #32
malvosenior wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All governments push propaganda. Russia's miniscule ad spend on FB had no measurable effect (please provide proof if you think this is wrong). Clinton and Trump spent many order of magnitude more on political advertising than any foreign nation and even that didn't assure their win. People aren't mindless robots, they vote for who they want to vote for.

"No measurable effect" is a weak argument - especially considering we're talking about it, and it massively influenced the narrative - amplified by the mainstream media, just like Trump used effectively. "They vote for who they want to vote for" - you understand manipulation is a thing, right? And that people will believe lies, and that people are often irrational - and therefore when they "decide" who to vote for it…

If someone wants to claim that Russia made a measurable impact on the 2016 election with $100k ad spend, then they're going to have to provide proof.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg still doesn't get it

#36

Post by basch »

wayne_skylar wrote: post #22

Oh I think he does get it. Facebook is a tool uniquely designed to influence behavior. Before you had to advertise to a generic stereotype of a person whereas now -- thanks to facebook's treasure trove of user data -- you can target just the perfect audience to get your ideas spreading organically. Facebook sells the ability to do this to anybody who will pay. This is the core of how they make money. After a period o…

free speech is different than amplified speech. what people are allowed to say on a platform shouldnt equal what people can pay to have amplified and targeted towards peoples attention.

But I agree with you, that "he gets it" in the sense that as a leader and figurehead his job is to inspire confidence. It may not be working for you, but his mantra for a long time now has been to extol the virtues of what is possible if people dream and focus on the benefits. Unlike much of the userbase here, he chooses to project the public personification of his self as a glass half full person, where optimism, hard work, engineering, and money are put towards a better future. He knows that if he relaxes and steps back from that ruse, charade, or whatever you want to call it, that it leads to a crumbling house of cards. Not unlike a president, confidence in the system starts with the top of the house. Don''t forget, his job is also to keep his stock prices up for his shareholders, who are primarily himself. And despite what the fifth estate and a subset of techies want to believe, facebook and its suite of products are as popular as ever. Sure, growth has slowed, but thats bound to happen once you count 1/3rd of the words population as those that your tool serves.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg still doesn't get it

#37

Post by pbreit »

I still think it’s the critics who don’t get it. The technology was always going to obviously move in this direction. The critics confoundingly both complain about the power of tech behemoths AND that they should be arbiting freedom on their platforms.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg still doesn't get it

#38

Post by sebow »

wnmurphy wrote: post #4

Facebook was used in 2016 by the Kremlin for disinformation warfare with the express purpose of swaying the results of our presidential election. Facebook recently adopted an official policy that they will not remove political ads which are blatantly, demonstrably false. This policy was drafted by Katie Harbath, Facebook's Public Policy Director of Global Elections, who was previously Chief Digital Strategist for the…

You're talking like Russia is the only government doing this. Are you this naive or just not informed? Every government tries to swing elections in countries that are in their interest.It would be abnormal if this wasn't the case.

I'm neither from US nor russia(as an eastern european you can imagine our resentment towards russia and their imperialistic views).

And FB(alongside google,twitter and other corporations that have social networks that allow -- public -- discourse) are not simple "private platforms/companies", they enjoy subsidies from the government,act as private companies(which they are) while also having the privilege of acting as a publisher(like outlets) meaning they are not directly responsible for the content on their platforms.Legally is is a very gray area due to US constitution, especially when your platforms hosts legally elected representatives of the government(this is why they can't just "shut down trump on twitter").

Facebook is toxic, Google is very toxic aswell as of late.The internet needs to be more open,decentralized and distributed if we ever want to have a chance of avoiding tyranny and suppression of thought. Sounds very "apocalyptic" but take a glimpse of what's happening in China,they're de facto using and indirectly cooperating with western corporations to implement very nasty social programs.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg still doesn't get it

#39

Post by bambax »

PunchTornado wrote: post #13
ixtli wrote: post #11

I actually subjected myself the the entire 30 minute video of his speech and there’s little else I can say other than that it was embarrassing, bordering on disgusting in its western chauvinism. And I don’t just mean castigation of Chinese government policy: he quite literally said it’s in the worlds best interest for Americans to continue controlling the censorship policies for the entire internet.

1) the GDPR is European and has a huge effect in changing policies for internet giants 2) are you defending the government currently imprisoning millions of people in indoctrination camps just because they believe in something?

The US has the highest incarceration rate in the world, so they're not in a position to lecture any other country about freedom.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg still doesn't get it

#40

Post by yousajoe »

wnmurphy wrote: post #4

Facebook was used in 2016 by the Kremlin for disinformation warfare with the express purpose of swaying the results of our presidential election. Facebook recently adopted an official policy that they will not remove political ads which are blatantly, demonstrably false. This policy was drafted by Katie Harbath, Facebook's Public Policy Director of Global Elections, who was previously Chief Digital Strategist for the…

>Facebook was used in 2016 by the Kremlin for disinformation warfare with the express purpose of swaying the results of our presidential election

As if a $100k ad buy [1] will sway voters. $100K is insignificant for social media ad spend and won't influence anything and marketers knows this, but the masses do not. Both candidates spent $81 Million on facebook ads [3] and $100K is a joke representing 0.05 of ad-spend.

The media and democratic party knows people are clueless about advertising and has made this "russia hacked elections using FB", a talking point that helps their narrative. FB ads are not that effective.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/06/technology/facebook-russi...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/2016-electi...

[3] https://techcrunch.com/2017/11/01/russian-facebook-ad-spend/

Post reply on HN