Facebook Gets Rid of 'Pseudoscience' Ad-Targeting Category

Facebook has removed "pseudoscience" as an option for advertisers that want to target audiences, a category available until this week even as the world's largest social media network vowed to curb misinformation about the COVID-19 pandemic. Reuters reports: The company has also paused the availability of some other interest categories while it evaluates its list, a Facebook spokeswoman confirmed in an email after Reuters found "conspiracy theory" was no longer an ad-targeting option. The company eliminated the pseudoscience category from its "detailed targeting" list on Wednesday, the spokeswoman said by phone, after tech news site The Markup showed that it could advertise a post targeting people interested in pseudoscience. The Markup demonstrated that Facebook was allowing such ads after saying it would police COVID-19 misinformation on its platform. More than 78 million Facebook users were interested in "pseudoscience," it said, citing Facebook's ad portal.

Re:

[blue41]

'Pseudoscience' was cool science.

Re:

[Joce640k]

Occams Razor: If Facebook removed this category it's because its not profitable, not because they suddenly developed some morals.

Maybe most sellers simply target "Republican" instead of dicking around in sub-categories like "Conservative" and "Woo-woo believers".

Re:

[moxrespawn]

Occam was (extremely) theist. Do we put him under "pseudoscience" along with "woo-woo believers"?

Re:

[self-inflicted]

Well yes, of course we do. Doesn't mean everything he said was bunk.

Re:

[hyades1]

It would seem you are unable to distinguish between the tool and the tool-maker. That's a very silly mistake.

WTF

[belg4mit]

Why did these even exist in the first place?

Yes, of course, greed... but it seems like it would have taken am especially amoral and twisted view to even devise and follow through with implementing these.

Re:WTF

[phantomfive]

Yes, of course, greed... but it seems like it would have taken am especially amoral and twisted view to even devise and follow through with implementing these.

Welcome to the world of advertising. If you talked to the person who implemented this, you would find that they had an explanation of logic and rhetoric that was enough to justify it in their minds. Most advertisers need to develop these kinds of justifications, because they know at some level what they do is annoy people.

Ultimately advertisers are like the rest of us, they need to make a living, and doing this is something that pays, and that is why they do it.

Re:

[Tom]

This.

They know they're scum, but they can explain it away the same way drug dealers and small-time criminals do. (big-time criminals, on the other hand, are often far enough on the sociopath scale to not care, e.g. bankers)

Re:

[Cmdln Daco]

When you use the layman version of the term 'sociopath' to describe beings you dislike, you are engaging in the same reckless psuedoscience we are supposedly deploring. Sociopath is a specific psychological diagnosos, and you are almost certainly not qualified to be tossing the term around.

Re:

[Tom]

You can use whatever term you want, the fact that you answered like you did proves that you understood precisely what I meant, and that is the purpose of communication. So linguistic puritanism aside, all is well.

Re:

[SK_CUPost]

A lot of pseudoscience is comparatively harmless, at least on the surface. If some people amuse themselves with Ancient Aliens theories, possibly even in an ironic this-is-fun-but-it's-all-crap kind of way, and someone wants to advertise an Ancient Aliens tour to them, then this is the category they'd pay for. But going a little deeper, it does present the danger of degrading scientific discourse among the general population, making it easier for people to believe garbage about more serious issues. Nobody

Re:

[Mr. Dollar Ton]

Why did these even exist in the first place?

Because pseudoscience exists.

amoral and twisted view to even devise and follow through with implementing these.

Well, it is worse now. Guess where all pseudoscience is going to end up now. Yep, in the "science" category.

This means

[lessSockMorePuppet]

This means that they're not only not fighting fake news, and people aren't just slipping by their factcheckers.

No, this is much worse. They are actively peddling false information while turning around and claiming to be fighting it.

Re:

[Skuld-Chan]

Its even worse that too - they also removed a category "conspiracy theory". Consumer reports also found that "Facebook approving ads containing coronavirus misinformation, including false claims that the virus was a hoax or that people could stay healthy through small daily doses of bleach.

Re:

[excelsior_gr]

Have you ever met a salesperson?

Re:WTF

[AmiMoJo]

These are standard advertising categories. Try requesting your data from a few ad companies via GDPR, you will find they rate you for all kinds of things.

Susceptibility to bullshit covers numerous categories they score you for. Pseudoscience would normally be broken down into sub categories like astrology, medical breakthroughs, fake celebrity endorsements etc. Then they know exactly which ad to put on your Facebook feed.

Re:

[Opportunist]

Because it's a profitable demographic. People who believe any bullshit you tell them, what's not to like as an advertiser?

Here comes a fake apology

[macdaddy357]

Facebook will say they are sorry, and try to blame it on a few rogue employees, but helping con men find marks has been a profit center for them all along.

OMFG! How the hell

[mark_reh]

will Trump and Putin target Trump's base in the upcoming election?

How do I target gullible people now?

[tap]

Because that's what these catagories were for. Ads targeted at gullible people with poor critical thinking skills are very effective. Good ROI.

How can they know?

[AndyKron]

The interesting thing is people who believe in pseudoscience don't think of it as pseudoscience.

Re:

[lgw]

So about global warming ...

Re: How can they know?

[Avoiderman]

That is science.

Your ignorance isn't an argument.

Re:

[lgw]

I thought it was hockey. Guess it's pseudohockey.

I don't have anything to do with FB

[Randj Herdle]

Does someone know whether they have a category "Religion"? Just use that tag instead.

Re:

[Antique Geekmeister]

You're referring to Scientology and how L. Ron Hubbard's "science of the mind" evaded prosecution for medical fraud, and came to a settlement for tax fraud? It's fascinating I'm old enough to remember when they switched to calling themselves a religion.

Got rid of the category

[CanadianMacFan]

And all of the ads just got moved into science so Facebook could keep the money coming in. /s

Except for Traditional Chinese Medicine ...

[Geodesy99]

WHO has made pushing Traditional Chinese Medicine part of their official agenda: https://www.who.int/traditiona... [who.int] especially for countries that have rotten healthcare systems. So WHO has set up there own feed to Social Media and Search Engines to deal with misinformation: https://www.who.int/teams/risk... [who.int] So I'll be bear bile at your local wet market isn't filtered out

Target with real science

[Martin S.]

The obvious solution would be to bombard these idiots with genuine public information ads, like how to wash their hands and don't drink bleach.

Should be used a few more times

[gnasher719]

Like with a message "You receive this message because you are listed in Facebooks 'Pseudoscience' category, which identifies you as an individual who is extremely gullible and will believe any nonsense. As such, you may have received messages aimed at the gullible, either to spread nonsense pseudo-science to you, or to use you as a patty preventing real science from helping people, or to defraud. Or all three combined. And 5G towers have nothing to do with COVID-19 whatsoever. If we told you to drink bleach

But they introduced a new category...

[andi75]

Gullible.

Pseudoscience is better

[tflf]

Why do people buy into this nonsense?

"Pseudoscience is better than regular science because it reinforces my personal world view!"
"Pseudoscience is better than regular science because it is rejected by the intellectual elitists!"
"Pseudoscience is better than regular science because it's not based on rules I don't understand, or believe!"
"Pseudoscience is better than regular science because it's magical!"
"Pseudoscience is better than regular science. Look how much longer the word is!"

Hanlon's razor always applies: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

All Science is Pseudoscience

[Cmdln Daco]

All Science is pseudoscience. Because once you use the term capital-S Science, you are talking about a static thing, and not the scientific method which is a dynamic process. People who are not scientists fall into this error a lot.

Thats why the 'becuz science' climate change zealots fail. Because they don't grasp the nature of the scientific process and grasp Science as something to bludgeon their opponent with. A variant on the old appeal to authority thing.

Re:

[Kielistic]

People that are scientists fall into that error a lot. Science became a religion and I'm not sure there is any going back now. Once people attach a belief to moral superiority it's all over.

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

I wish Facebook would let me block the crap

[Mike Van Pelt]

Seriously. I've got a couple of people I don't want to lose touch with, who, alas, post every dang organonaturopathiwholistimacrobioticacrystalwoo-woo thing they can find, with a side order of anti-vax. I'd like to block those, but not their personal postings.