Facebook widens ban on political ads as alarm rises over election • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook widens ban on political ads as alarm rises over election

#81

Post by pjc50 » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 10:04 AM UTC

ogre_codes wrote: post #18

This just seems like too little, too late. Much of the problems I see aren't advertising in the traditional sense, but viral content from sketchy sources. If they wanted to seriously affect this, they would prevent posts from spreading to tens of thousands/ millions of people without being vetted.

This reminds me of the California/Australia wildfires. They're the result of a whole cascade of problems, from global warming to the details of under-supported local firefighting infrastructure, but those at the top aren't interested in any of those until they start to feel the heat approach them.

I think the possibility of election "chaos" is starting to look real; you've already had this year "armed protestors occupy State building", "crowdfunded anti-protestor gunman", huge ongoing demonstrations, voter rights lawsuits, and chaos in the mail system on which mail-in ballots depend. This is going to make the whole Bush vs Gore hanging chad debacle look like a gentlemanly dispute from a vanished age.

Those at the top of Facebook won't mind a clean victory for either side. They don't even mind a one-off clearing of the streets with live ammunition. What they will mind is ongoing violent struggle for the legitimacy of the state.

(absolutely not a given, but definitely a risk. Much like the President catching the virus that's dangerous to unfit people over 65.)

Re: Facebook widens ban on political ads as alarm rises over election

#82

Post by wastedhours » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 10:08 AM UTC

torben-friis wrote: post #36

ogre_codes wrote: post #18

This just seems like too little, too late. Much of the problems I see aren't advertising in the traditional sense, but viral content from sketchy sources. If they wanted to seriously affect this, they would prevent posts from spreading to tens of thousands/ millions of people without being vetted.

You make an interesting point: what would a social network of limited range look like? Something where you couldn't have more than a set number of connections, things didn't spread more than two nodes in the graph, and resharing wasn't an option. I think it would be ideal to fill in the mainstream need for facebook ( keeping in touch with people)

The "problem" (and I use the term "problem" from the perspective of the network, I don't believe it actually is a net problem for the world) - is that limited the reach of content would potentially reduce the amount of content to interact with exponentially.

Lack of content, lack of engagement, lack of reason to keep returning. Healthier for the world, but, potentially a very hard problem to solve from the platform provider side to keep it going long term.

There will be models that get it right, but would require quite large shifts in user behaviour.

It'd definitely be nice though.

Re: Facebook widens ban on political ads as alarm rises over election

#83

Post by sdfkkksdfsdff » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 10:09 AM UTC

I really hope Facebook can not interfere in the elections. If they can do that, it would be a serious cause for concern.

But how would they do that? Send a zombie code to the brains of its users? Hack into voting machines?

That article makes little sense, imo.

Re: Facebook widens ban on political ads as alarm rises over election

#84

Post by skocznymroczny » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 10:19 AM UTC

chillwaves wrote: post #73

skocznymroczny wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The other half believes that Trump called neonazis and white supremacists very fine people and told people to drink bleach to fight coronavirus. Let's not pretend only one side is biased and uses misinformation for its purposes.

Coronavirus: Outcry after Trump suggests injecting disinfectant as treatment https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52407177

There is a difference between "suggests injecting disinfectant as treatment" and "tells people to drink bleach". There are many possible treatments being suggested for covid, but that doesn't mean you should try them until they are confirmed to work.

Re: Facebook widens ban on political ads as alarm rises over election

#85

Post by bladegash » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 10:28 AM UTC

From the post about the potential for upcoming anti-trust actions against Big Tech earlier this week[1]:

“One thing that occurred to me is the potential that Democrats could be using the threat of anti trust actions to pressure the tech companies to be more proactive, re: misinformation prior to the elections. Guess we will know if they make any significant policy changes over the next week or two.”

Now I guess we will see if Google and the rest to make any announcements :-).

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24697860

Re: Facebook widens ban on political ads as alarm rises over election

#86

Post by ponker » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 10:28 AM UTC

ogre_codes wrote: post #18

This just seems like too little, too late. Much of the problems I see aren't advertising in the traditional sense, but viral content from sketchy sources. If they wanted to seriously affect this, they would prevent posts from spreading to tens of thousands/ millions of people without being vetted.

The problem that the Internet has exposed is that the average person is too susceptible to lies to be a useful contributor to republic-style electoral governance.

Re: Facebook widens ban on political ads as alarm rises over election

#87

Post by baq » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 10:47 AM UTC

KiranRao0 wrote: post #27

I would love if Facebook could simply remove all political ads. The problem then becomes what classifies as political ad. This can be very obvious (vote for president = political, buy cereal = not political), but it can also be far less obvious. For example, would an ad for in support of an oil pipeline be considered a political ad? What if it's in support for an outcome of a referendum? Or an Ad for a charity? What…

everything can be made political, most things are political. humans are political animals. it's a great success of politicians who are gatekeeping non-politicians from making political statements (e.g. pressuring book authors to 'keep their political opinions to themselves' on twitter, etc.)

even weather can be made political, see sharpie-wielding POTUS making amends to NHC forecasts.

Re: Facebook widens ban on political ads as alarm rises over election

#88

Post by tim333 » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 10:58 AM UTC

ogre_codes wrote: post #18

This just seems like too little, too late. Much of the problems I see aren't advertising in the traditional sense, but viral content from sketchy sources. If they wanted to seriously affect this, they would prevent posts from spreading to tens of thousands/ millions of people without being vetted.

Or just a button for 'this is fake news' or some such. Once say 10 people click that they stop it spreading. Bit like the flagging system on HN.

Re: Facebook widens ban on political ads as alarm rises over election

#89

Post by throwaway0a5e » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 11:01 AM UTC

tim333 wrote: post #88

ogre_codes wrote: post #18

This just seems like too little, too late. Much of the problems I see aren't advertising in the traditional sense, but viral content from sketchy sources. If they wanted to seriously affect this, they would prevent posts from spreading to tens of thousands/ millions of people without being vetted.

Or just a button for 'this is fake news' or some such. Once say 10 people click that they stop it spreading. Bit like the flagging system on HN.

I think that will just reinforce filter bubbles.

Anything from the "other side" (where "other" is relative to the initial reach of whoever posted it) is just gonna flop.

Re: Facebook widens ban on political ads as alarm rises over election

#90

Post by itsoktocry » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 11:05 AM UTC

tim333 wrote: post #88

ogre_codes wrote: post #18

This just seems like too little, too late. Much of the problems I see aren't advertising in the traditional sense, but viral content from sketchy sources. If they wanted to seriously affect this, they would prevent posts from spreading to tens of thousands/ millions of people without being vetted.

Or just a button for 'this is fake news' or some such. Once say 10 people click that they stop it spreading. Bit like the flagging system on HN.

>Or just a button for 'this is fake news' or some such. Once say 10 people click that they stop it spreading. Bit like the flagging system on HN.

We are now in year 5, the second election cycle, and you think the solution is as easy as adding a flagging system?