Facebook’s top execs ‘make tobacco executives look like Mr. Rogers’

Post by smt88 » Sun, Nov 18, 2018, 6:15 PM UTC

dontreact wrote: post #38

smt88 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tobacco has killed more people so far. Facebook accepted a lot of money to help Trump win, so if he were to start a war or something, I think the blood would also be on Facebook's hands. Climate change is a whole other issue with him, though less direct. Also, I understand the headline to be a comparison of tactics, not of harm. And as for the share button, writers don't make their site's templates.

Facebook accepted more money from the Clinton campaign though right?

Post by austenallred » Sun, Nov 18, 2018, 6:19 PM UTC

lallysingh wrote: post #64

austenallred wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really doesn’t make sense to me that the argument is basically this: “The x military shared anti-y Facebook posts, then caused a genocide of the y people.” And Facebook is at fault? Do we really expect Facebook to police speech at that level, or should we not place the blame with the military? Those posts came from .0000066% of Facebook’s users. If you’re Facebook how do you effectively police that?

Hey those kids chose to smoke those Camels! How's the cigarette company responsible?

Post by SirLJ » Sun, Nov 18, 2018, 6:41 PM UTC

smt88 wrote: post #15

cryoshon wrote: post #6

perhaps this is an incendiary comment, but i really do wonder what all of the HN facebook employees are telling themselves to deal with the cognitive dissonance caused by this latest scandal wherein facebook paid for smear campaigns to distract from their own dirty laundry. every time i have encountered these people on HN, they've portrayed a cultlike naivety regarding their organization's actions. they always allude…

I wondered about this too. I'm someone who won't work in any adtech at all for ethical reasons. I asked my friend who works at FB, and he said, "I don't know about all that. I just want to work on cool tech." I think that's how most humans feel about their role in orgs like Facebook, so I don't judge him at all.

Post by SirLJ » Sun, Nov 18, 2018, 10:21 PM UTC

justapassenger wrote: post #76

SirLJ wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A Genocide Incited on Facebook, With Posts From Myanmar’s Military https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/15/technology/myanmar-facebo...

I’m not arguing there were no deaths because of Facebook, or that Facebook shouldn’t be hold accountable for bad things. I’m arguing your statement that one death is too many. That’s very naive metric, as you can apply it to any big company.

Post by chillacy » Mon, Nov 19, 2018, 3:57 AM UTC

dontreact wrote: post #50

chillacy wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The internet has made the world a smaller place, I’m not sure local newscasts would have survived longer anyways just like local ironsmiths and cobblers disappeared in a world with a global supply chain.

My point is that the platforms haven’t replaced something important that the newspapers were doing, which came not from a profit motive but from a motive of journalistic duty. There is not much money to be made in raising awareness of how local government works. But it’s important for society. Your examples are cases where global brands met the need exactly because the free market works well in those cases. Just beca…