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

Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 609 posts

Re: Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

#451

Post by unethical_ban »

hunterb123 wrote: post #309
unethical_ban wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I completely disagree with your assessment. No one is trying to silence people for saying "poor people are worth less than me, taxes are inherently evil, non-whites are probably illegals, and abortion is murder". I'm using the most offensive stereotypes to make the point that no one is even trying to ban those ideas. The concern is the spread of lies known to be generated by bad actors, and how to handle it. Does "mo…

They are banning dissenting information that looks bad for them. Similar to how CCP bans political dissent, Dems ban any stories on Hunter Biden for example. The Dems also ban things that look bad on China, like the lab leak, I suppose because they share some of the same goals. Also the election is perfectly reasonable to question. It's fine to question why the bell weathers and many other record indicators were brok…

No one has called for bans of discussions of the lab leak theory (or no one mainstream). It was simply obvious that early harping about it from Tucker Carlson was a useless distraction in the early time of the pandemic, when the rest of the world was focusing on how to respond to the pandemic instead of beating the shit out of Asians and calling Coronavirus "Wuhan flu" to enrage the libs.

No one has "banned" discussion of Hunter Biden. (I just saw your reply to someone else saying it was censored from facebook; I would be interested in seeing any evidence of that). Downvoting isn't censorship. Lack of prioritizing coverage by a newspaper could be a concern, but that isn't censorship (and boy, do I have some news for you if you don't know how Fox does its reporting).

Republicans have barely lifted a finger when in power to secure voting systems, or take any interest in voting security. You keep on acting like Republicans care about election security (or election fairness at all) but they don't. They care about disenfranchisement.

There was no evidence of widespread voter fraud in 2020, as stated by Secretaries of State from multiple states Republican-led and Democrat-led. As shown by reviews in multiple states that were done for partisan reasons (we lost and we don't like Democrats winning).

Voting records might have been broken because political polarization is at a high note and we had a hugely polarizing president in office.

The investigation into Russian interference was related to disinformation campaigns and collusion with members of the Trump campaign, NOT voter or election fraud.

It found evidence of that, but the Republican-led house did nothing with the information. https://wannabewonk.com/summary-of-hypocrisies/

edit2: Ah, yes, you're talking about the discredited hitpieces that were released in the weeks before the election. Yes, it seems those were throttled, openly and transparently, due to them being discredited hitpieces.

Re: Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

#452

Post by initplus »

breadzeppelin__ wrote: post #29
shoto_io wrote: post #3

No. That’s what people like us and all the main stream media hope for. But: most people I know don’t have the slightest clue that Insta and WhatsApp belong to the FB group. And even worse: most of them don’t give a shit about the reputation of FB. They just want to send messages and share pictures through those apps.

To go a bit further MSM's ad revenue is being hollowed out by Facebook et al. Why would anyone pay to advertise in Economist when they can advertise to "people interested in economics, earning over 150k, last thought about cigarettes three weeks ago" etc. Similarly, if you were an advertising exec at pfizer, would you choose to pay millions of dollars to advertise your meds to a continuously shrinking audience on som…

I have a couple of friends who are much more politically engaged and insightful than myself. But all I see them post on facebook are low effort gotcha memes.

Facebook has a problem in that it seems to frown on "intelligent" content. Long form journalism, in depth analysis, professional content (industry journals, tech blogs etc.), none of this content really exists on facebook.

I have friends that read hackernews, we find similar articles from hn interesting. But I would never think of sharing one on facebook, and I would be surprised if a friend of mine did so. For some reason, facebook is just not the place where content like this is shared.

This is the advertising proposition of non-facebook media.

Re: Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

#453

Post by soylentcola »

dreamcompiler wrote: post #310
b3morales wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> all the tobacco companies did was shift their business into providing alternatives to cigarettes. But they're still made from nicotine. Isn't this okay? Asking genuinely -- I haven't followed this one way or the other. But my understanding was that the health problems were mostly caused by the smoke. Does nicotine itself cause problems when delivered via gum or vape or whatever? Certainly the current ingestion meth…

If vaping was pure nicotine its health effects would be limited (i.e. much less dangerous than tobacco smoke). Unfortunately most vape devices deliver a witches brew of nasty chemicals (besides nicotine) added for flavor and increased addiction potential just like cigarettes did. Many of said chemicals have less well-studied health effects than those in tobacco.

Typically they contain nicotine suspension and a small percentage of flavorings suspended in glycerin. It's basically the food-grade version of a fog machine at a night club (works the same way by heating a similar base to produce a mist).

I quit smoking years ago by using a vaporizer and quickly learned to mix my own liquid in order to lower costs, keep track of what was in it, and get lower nicotine than what was available in most commercial stuff at the time.

Not claiming it's as healthy as breathing fresh mountain air, but it's hardly some innately toxic "witches brew" of unknown compounds. Made a huge difference in my health and I haven't smoked in 7 or 8 years now. Sadly, despite the lengths many reputable producers of vape liquid went to regarding ingredients and preparation, many have been put out of business by harsher restrictions than those on actual smoking tobacco.

Re: Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

#454

Post by int_19h »

quotemstr wrote: post #95
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> most of them don’t give a shit about the reputation of FB This is close to a straw man argument. Nobody claims users will abandon Facebook. The article posits, instead, strengthening headwinds. Headwinds in hiring (there is already a double-digit premium Facebook must pay for talent). From recurring whistleblowing, and its impact on morale and productivity. Headwinds in projects and partnerships, like Libre/Diem be…

> there is already a double-digit premium Facebook must pay for talent That's an odd way of putting it. Do Google and Netflix and other big tech companies face the same "headwinds"? Their compensation is comparable. Facebook pays a premium because it's drawing from the top of the talent pool and is facing competition from other companies trying to acquire people with the same level of exceptional skill. The idea that…

I can't speak for others, but I can tell you that I have been contacted by FB recruiters more than once, and turned them down every time precisely because of their reputation (and made it very clear to them, as well). I would certainly consider it a stain on my resume at this point.

Re: Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

#455

Post by rumblerock »

gorwell wrote: post #424
Karrot_Kream wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that there's way too much unnecessary vitrol over FB on these forums, but let's not pretend like FB is some "new, scrappy disruptor" of legacy media institutions engaging in a "coordinated attack". Facebook has just become the _new_ media power and legacy media is trying to reassert itself. I didn't enjoy the stranglehold of legacy media on information flow before and I don't enjoy the strangle of Facebook no…

I'd be more than happy if facebook disappeared. They are a disaster, no doubt. That's not what's going to happen though. Facebook will get exactly what they keep saying they want: regulation and oversight. Facebook will be just as entrenched as ever and will protect the Official Copy of Reality as defined by the ruling class. They are already doing that to some degree and just want it to be codified. My concern is fo…

Is oversight of and transparency into recommendation algorithms, to make sure they don't overprioritize vitriol and sow division, really creating an "Official Copy of Reality"? At this point I'd say our reality is actively being fractured by the effects of these platforms. The solutions suggested by Haugen, whose disclosure is driving this broader conversation we're having, are related to fundamental algorithmic design that feeds addiction and propagates completely false or harmful information – which is not exactly content moderation by the "powers that be".

Re: Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

#456

Post by rumblerock »

Taywee wrote: post #226
breadzeppelin__ wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To go a bit further MSM's ad revenue is being hollowed out by Facebook et al. Why would anyone pay to advertise in Economist when they can advertise to "people interested in economics, earning over 150k, last thought about cigarettes three weeks ago" etc. Similarly, if you were an advertising exec at pfizer, would you choose to pay millions of dollars to advertise your meds to a continuously shrinking audience on som…

> it seems like most of the critiques of social media coming from big / old media are just symptoms of having their revenue bled away A large portion of it is people who find advertisement inherently distasteful (or, at the least, targeted advertisement) and that optimizing everything entirely for engagement causes massively negative effects for society and individual psychology. Fine-tuning everything for addiction…

Agreed, painting this as some kind of power struggle ignores the effects on society that affect everyone, not just new age tech titans and the establishment.

Re: Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

#457

Post by rumblerock »

nradov wrote: post #217
shoto_io wrote: post #3

No. That’s what people like us and all the main stream media hope for. But: most people I know don’t have the slightest clue that Insta and WhatsApp belong to the FB group. And even worse: most of them don’t give a shit about the reputation of FB. They just want to send messages and share pictures through those apps.

I am aware that Facebook has done a bunch of bad stuff, and that they own Instagram and WhatsApp. I still don't give a shit. For all it's faults Facebook is still the most convenient way to keep up with friends and family spread around the world, and share my underwater photography. If you engage with Facebook on your own terms and "hide all from" the news / politics / meme pages then it works great. And it's free! A…

So you don't give a shit about how their bad decisions affect the broader society we live in?

Re: Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

#458

Post by oceliker »

wolverine876 wrote: post #379

> The most damaging claim this week gained the least attention. Ms Haugen alleges that Facebook has concealed a decline in its young American users. She revealed internal projections that a drop in teenagers’ engagement could lead to an overall decline in American users of 45% within the next two years. Investors have long faced a lack of open disclosure. Misleading advertisers would undermine the source of nearly al…

To be fair to them, they say it's the "most damaging" claim, not the most significant. Misleading advertisers is more damaging to Facebook than misleading users, unfortunately.

Re: Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

#459

Post by rumblerock »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #26

The biggest component missing from Silicon Valley's discussion of Facebook is its pathological lying. They lied to the FTC [1]. They lied to WhatsApp and the EU [2]. They created an Oversight Board and then lied to it [3]. (These just off the top of my head.) The culture is perceived to be dishonest from the top down. That is why they get bludgeoned more than Twitter, or even Tik Tok. That is what its surrogates miss…

Luckily in Haugen's senate appearance the subcommittee seemed to be in full bipartisan agreement that they had been lied to. I'm glad that they are finally starting to sufficiently wrap their heads around this issue to start doing something about it and holding FB to account.
Post reply on HN