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

Facebook to let users turn off political adverts

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 510 posts

Re: Facebook to let users turn off political adverts

#371

Post by captainmuon »

at_a_remove wrote: post #226
captainmuon wrote: post #187

I see where they are coming from, but this seems backwards to me. I would like to block all commercial ads, but it seems really important to me that people see political ads. Granted, the current campaigns in the US are messed up and most ads look like propaganda, but this is a narrow view of what politics can be. Because on the other hand, as a political activist I know how incredibly hard it is to get your message…

It's really important to you that other people see what kinds of ads you want them to see. I just have to take a step back from this for a second, because I really, really dislike the concept that other people have decided that I need to be politically educated (and through Facebook ads, no less). Goodness. If you wish to view political ads, or adds for dog hair brushes, by all means, go for it. Do not attempt to for…

Maybe this is a cultural difference. I lived in Germany for a long time, and here "political education" ("politische bildung") is something you get in school (e.g. as part of history lessons). This is probably a result of experiencing the decline of democracy, and the rise of fascism. Note this is not about partisanal topics, but about how the separation of powers work, federalism, what happens with your taxes, and even complex things like monetary policy (if you take certain classes).

I think the idea to educate the people on general political issues is not too foreign to the US, at least I've seen many PSAs there, which they don't have over here.

The idea is not to force anybody to watch anything. My idea would be akin to putting up an informational poster next to an advertizing poster outside. But I've made the experience that in many places you literally can't put a billboard up or run a radio ad if it has political / "world-view-based" content - such as talking about unions, rent control, atheism etc. - whereas it is fine to advertize beer or dog hair brushes or any other product.

Conversely, now many platforms actually "force" you to sit through an ad before you get to your content. Tell me, why is it OK if that clip is an ad for some random beauty product, but sinister if it is about the pros or cons of wind energy?

What I'm envisioning is not "forcing" anybody to view anything, but for example changing the display algorithms of social media. Let 10 percent or so be an unbiased selection of posts showing different world views. I'm sure the text analysis algorithms could provide that.

But yeah, I'd find it beneficial for society if I could get more eyeballs on non-commercial, important-for-society topics. This is the same reason I occasionally hang up a poster in a public place. And I honestly believe it is good if someone passes by my poster and reads it on their way to work. (They are also free to ignore it!)

Re: Facebook to let users turn off political adverts

#372

Post by 0xffff2 »

BiteCode_dev wrote: post #335
0xffff2 wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ublock hasn't been able to block facebook ads for me for several months at least.

ublock or ublock origin?

origin. I didn't realize that the original ublock even still exists.

I also have every built in list enabled except for regional lists.

Re: Facebook to let users turn off political adverts

#373

Post by adrianmonk »

I'd also love a feature that lets me block non-advertising political content.

A lot of people like to use Facebook as a political soapbox. That's not what I want out of it. I want to stay connected to people, hear updates, socialize, etc.

Some people push it so far that the solution of unfriending them is easy. But not everybody is so egregious that I want the nuclear option. (For example, relatives who are vocal about politics.)

Text classification is a thing, and there are many other techniques, so it seems possible to recognize political content with some reasonable level of accuracy and show me a lot less of that.

Maybe this would even go beyond making my own feed better. If enough people feel the same, maybe it would cut down on the audience size and reduce people's temptation to get on a soapbox.

Re: Facebook to let users turn off political adverts

#374

Post by at_a_remove »

captainmuon wrote: post #371
at_a_remove wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's really important to you that other people see what kinds of ads you want them to see. I just have to take a step back from this for a second, because I really, really dislike the concept that other people have decided that I need to be politically educated (and through Facebook ads, no less). Goodness. If you wish to view political ads, or adds for dog hair brushes, by all means, go for it. Do not attempt to for…

Maybe this is a cultural difference. I lived in Germany for a long time, and here "political education" ("politische bildung") is something you get in school (e.g. as part of history lessons). This is probably a result of experiencing the decline of democracy, and the rise of fascism. Note this is not about partisanal topics, but about how the separation of powers work, federalism, what happens with your taxes, and e…

And so I ask the question which is always the test: how would you feel about the algorithm including "information" which is directly opposed to your personal stance. Imagine a "CLIMATE CHANGE IS NOT REAL" poster. Would that also be acceptable? That is, after all, the world view of some.

My guess is that you would answer no to that, that such a thing would not be permitted. And so it begins ... who vets such a thing? And we are back to the issue of making Facebook (or anyone else) responsible for some kind of monitoring of what is and is not allowed.

Re: Facebook to let users turn off political adverts

#375

Post by lliamander »

amznthrwaway wrote: post #316
dragonwriter wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Republicans will block Democrat ads - will that lead to a better world when Republicans can't reach Democrat voters or vice versa? The piece indicates that there will be an option off political ads entirely, not to block political ads by partisan affiliation. (The latter is both more complex to even superficially inplement and would be rather ineffective because SuperPAC ads are formally unaffiliated with either pa…

Yes, but Republicans consistently use the term 'Democrat' instead of 'Democratic' because they don't want to imply that Democrats have a connection to the concept of Democracy. It's a shibboleth; folks who instinctively say "Democrat" are reliably far-right.

I'm not saying you are making things up, but that makes no sense to me. I don't think any Republicans I know are aware of that tactic, use that tactic, or would even think it's effective.

Re: Facebook to let users turn off political adverts

#376

Post by [deleted] »

amznthrwaway wrote: post #316
dragonwriter wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Republicans will block Democrat ads - will that lead to a better world when Republicans can't reach Democrat voters or vice versa? The piece indicates that there will be an option off political ads entirely, not to block political ads by partisan affiliation. (The latter is both more complex to even superficially inplement and would be rather ineffective because SuperPAC ads are formally unaffiliated with either pa…

Yes, but Republicans consistently use the term 'Democrat' instead of 'Democratic' because they don't want to imply that Democrats have a connection to the concept of Democracy. It's a shibboleth; folks who instinctively say "Democrat" are reliably far-right.

[deleted]

Re: Facebook to let users turn off political adverts

#377

Post by lliamander »

dfxm12 wrote: post #329
hairofadog wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the pro-Democratic party bias in almost all traditional media I often see this presented as a given, but it doesn't ring true to me. Is there some evidence or research I'm missing showing that traditional media is biased toward the Democratic party?

Quite the opposite, when you consider how the Sinclair Broadcast group is the largest owner of local broadcast stations, where most people get their news, and force their affiliates to run certain conservative segments. Then, consider how owners of 3 of the top 4 most circulated newspapers in the US are conservative: Frank Gannett and News Corp (which owns 2!).

I forget where the statistics are from, but as I recall a significant majority of all journalists are left of center.

Re: Facebook to let users turn off political adverts

#379

Post by t-writescode »

wombat-man wrote: post #202
elicash wrote: post #168

I'm a political advertiser as part of my job and one thing most people don't get is that it's not just ELECTORAL ads that Facebook usually is referring to when they're talking about "political" ads. It's, as mentioned in the article, a shorthand for "Ads About Social Issues, Elections or Politics." So, a few points. First, the obvious, that these things all depend on the extent to which Facebook promotes this "featur…

I feel ya, but that's not why I use facebook. I unfollow friends who mostly post political stuff, even though I generally agree with them. I'm there for pictures, the shared calendar and the messaging. I'll check out memeorandum or NYT for news, and will sometimes read political stuff on reddit or twitter. To me, I prefer FB as a way to stay connected with friends. I have many other ways to learn about political topi…

Your response reminds me of Captain Beatty's speech to Montag in Fahrenheit 451:

https://mediadwellers.files.wordpress.com/2016/02/beatty-spe...

Re: Facebook to let users turn off political adverts

#380

Post by edmundsauto »

retortio wrote: post #206
macspoofing wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This is exactly what Cambridge Analytica did The impact of Cambridge Analytica is so overstated that it crosses into hyperbole. They were a bunch of clowns with minimal impact that got magnified to a status of super-villain because you could use them to club Trump over the head with. And let's not lose sight of the big picture, namely before Trump accidentally won (yes, accidentally and barely), the Trump campaign w…

Exactly. Not just that, when the Obama used social media targeted advertising to its advantage it was fawned over in the media. Cambridge Analytica was targeted purely because they were on the wrong political side, it's as simple as that. Does anyone really think they would have gotten any attention if they were working for Hillary?

Yes, I think they would have been screamed about from every Republican supporting media outlet there is. And I think they were targeted because of the underhanded way they went about collecting data, and for violating FB ToS.

But the real reason that I think they were targeted? I think they leaned into it as a submarine PR coverage tactic. "We're so effective that it's a national scandal" was a great marketing tactic in the (hopefully bygone) era when amorality had no consequences.

Post reply on HN