Facebook is cooked

Post by bjt » Sat, Feb 21, 2026, 4:38 AM UTC

jballanc wrote: post #469

blibble wrote: post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's worse, cigarettes never threatened democracy the solution is real easy, section 230 should not apply if there's an recommendation algorithm involved treat the company as a traditional publisher because they are, they're editorialising by selecting the content vs, say, the old style facebook wall (a raw feed from user's friends), which should qualify for section 230

The problem with this is that section 230 was specifically created to promote editorializing. Before section 230, online platforms were loath to engage in any moderation because they feared that a hint of moderation would jump them over into the realm of "publisher" where they could be held liable for the veracity of the content they published and, given the choice between no moderation at all or full editorial respo…

Post by fragmede » Sat, Feb 21, 2026, 4:41 AM UTC

Aurornis wrote: post #255

curious_af wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

International flight attendant. So the algorithms for people that travel internationally a lot are drastically different from the people who remain stationary. If Facebook wanted to prevent themselves from negative publicity, they might have a different experience for the people who have political power (international travel might be the best proxy for that) What you're referring to may also be part of their XCheck p…

> So the algorithms for people that travel internationally a lot are drastically different from the people who remain stationary. I can confirm the same experience as the parent commenter for my family who still use Facebook even though most of them don't travel internationally. > If Facebook wanted to prevent themselves from negative publicity, they might have a different experience for the people who have political…

Post by foxglacier » Sat, Feb 21, 2026, 4:45 AM UTC

decimalenough wrote: post #445

shirro wrote: post #336

The algorithm has been given a job todo. First priority on any platform is engagement and a well functioning, complete human being is not going to be engaged by rage bait and hate. They are rare, precious jewels. The shit gets dumped on people who are lonely, have a grudge, feel left out. It is relentless and escalates until their brains cook. Algorithmic social media is a massive social harm. The people who are in d…

> The shit gets dumped on people who are lonely, have a grudge, feel left out. No, it gets dumped on pretty much everybody. My Insta consists of travel and food pictures, and the people I follow are friends IRL and a very few travel/food influencers. So my feed consists of friends, travel/food content, dirty jokes thanks to my buddy who keeps sending them, and an ever increasing proportion of ads. But both my "sugges…

Post by fluder » Sat, Feb 21, 2026, 4:53 AM UTC

throwaway876345 wrote: post #330

My aunt is in her late 70s. She is a retired public school teacher who taught for over 30 years. Over the years she spends a majority of her leisure her time glued to Facebook on her iPad, consuming whatever content is delivered by their algorithm. She's become MAGA and will not tolerate any criticism of any moral wrongdoing by the current president or members of his administration. It's unbelievable the turn.

Post by thephyber » Sat, Feb 21, 2026, 4:57 AM UTC

jedberg wrote: post #204

> So: is this just something wacky with my algorithm? No, it's not. Once Meta identifies you as male, you will get almost exclusively thirst trap posts no matter what you do. It started about two years ago. Some other interesting points: A woman posted on reddit recently saying she noticed her son's feed was filled with this stuff, so she created her own instagram account, identified as a man, and had the same feed.…