Mostly I hear them saying that what happens on FB etc is bad (which is very true) and that some vague thing ought to be done about it. I think even they don’t have any idea what actually ought to be done about it, other than that FB themselves ought to take out the trash.
Banzai
3525
The thing about shouting ‘fire’ in a theatre seems similar in lots of ways to what is happening on facebook. maybe the individual people who are spreading the imminently dangerous information should also be the ones to go after and not just the theatre owner? Not saying facebook doesnt have a huge role, because they decide who hears the dangerous messages.
If government wasn’t collectively so incredibly bad at technology, there might be a path to attack the Facebook Problem from the signal amplification side.
Nobody gives a shit that kooks post nonsense on IRC or Geocities (RIP) or alt.assholes.whitepower or whatever. We give a shit because the Facebook (and YouTube, and Twitter, and whatever else) platform amplifies those kooks and blasts vulnerable (old, stupid, incurious, uninformed, or otherwise impressionable) people with nonsense until their perceptions have diverged so far from reality that they vote for actual, literal, moustache-twirling evil and call it patriotic.
Make a publicly accountable, transparent agency with the ability to lever fines against technology platforms that signal-boost provably false statements.
Say whatever you want, Karen. Just don’t expect anyone to care.
Oh but Adam, what if social media platforms decide that they can’t signal-boost anything except for provably true statements?
Adam, what if social media platforms decide they can’t serve ads that haven’t been pre-screened to not be horseshit?
Making my argument for me, imaginary debaters. Making my argument for me.
I read this more as the Biden Administration flagging obvious problematic posts as examples because Facebook has had years to do something about this shit and has done fuck all to date. Kind of a wake up call of sorts : “Mark buddy, here’s a bunch of really obvious stuff about stolen elections, COVID cures, vaccine “shedding” and “nanobots”, etc., and if you and your people can’t figure out that this sort of malarkey is not just dividing Americans, but actually putting their lives at risk, and do something about it, then you’re going to force us to get involved, and nobody wants that.”
Like @scottagibson said, the government really wants Facebook (and others) to clean up their own mess and take out the trash, and they should be responsible for doing so. Rather than take over directly though, the Biden Administration has a much more chilling and effective tool at it’s disposal, one that would not only put the fear of god into social media companies, but also work to effectively hamstring right-wing media, and that is revising Section 230. Lo and behold, today there is talk of doing just that if these shitheels can’t police their own sites.
MikeJ
3529
This. Facebook’s algorithms control what type of information goes viral and from what types of sources. They have a fucking dial they can turn to adjust how truthful they want people’s newsfeeds to be, but they habitually set that the “not very truthful” both because that improves “engagement” and because one side in politics tends to lie a fuckton more and get’s angry when their lies aren’t treated as reliable information.
Is Facebook more or less accountable then Fox News for misinformation? How can we regulate each? Because I’m starting to think that the purest form of free speech rights eventually leads to the end of democracy.
RichVR
3531
I see it as, Fox writes and broadcasts their bullshit.
Facebook is a platform for idiots to spew their bullshit, but does not specifically write the posts.
Edit: Which is not to say that Facebook isn’t responsible.
So my point I guess is then: “isn’t Fox News a bigger target for regulation? Or OAN?” I mean, they are doing one more thing than Facebook is.
RichVR
3533
Well, After the Hannity thing, I think Fox may just be the bigger target.
Free speech is definitely bad.
Wasn’t amending 230 the exact same thing trump was ranting about in his last few weeks in office?
The question is do you want the fascists determining censorship?
That’s what would happen if Trump won and these rules were in effect.
I don’t know what the answer is, outside of using financial pressure on Facebook/Twitter, but even that is limited due to their international reach.
I’d argue for decentalization and breaking up big social media. This way the fash head into their own holes and they can just radicalize each other and the rest of us can be free from it.
So you didn’t read the post then? Cool, cool.
Just saw rest of it, I think we got similar ideas for “solutions”- though I doubt they’d work.
Ultimately I think the power is centralized power structures. Put too much information power in one place, it gets abused. I just don’t know if that problem is solvable, because social media by its very nature will lead to centralization.
ShivaX
3540
The reality is that consumers mostly want centralization.
Amazon, Steam, Twitter, Facebook, Walmart, etc, etc. It’s just a pain to have everything spread all over the place. One stop shopping is easier for most people regardless of the format and that just consolidates power in a few hands as people drift towards convenience.
Facebook is not responsible. But they should be accountable.
They are making editorial decisions over what people see and hear though.
It’s very similar to Reality TV. Editing to show the audience what you want them to see is as powerful and controlling as actually creating a script for actors to follow.
Facebook might not create the message, but they decide how far and wide certain messages are broadcast. They are the gatekeepers that allow certain stories to show up in your feed and others to slip away.
And they can make claims about the algorithm, but in the end, it’s the algorithm they created, so it’s like Truman blaming the bombers for dropping the bombs that he ordered.
