Report: Facebook Loophole 'Lets World Leaders Deceive and Harass Their Citizens' (theguardian.com) 39
"Facebook has repeatedly allowed world leaders and politicians to use its platform to deceive the public or harass opponents despite being alerted to evidence of the wrongdoing," reports the Guardian:
The Guardian has seen extensive internal documentation showing how Facebook handled more than 30 cases across 25 countries of politically manipulative behavior that was proactively detected by company staff.
The investigation shows how Facebook has allowed major abuses of its platform in poor, small and non-western countries in order to prioritize addressing abuses that attract media attention or affect the US and other wealthy countries. The company acted quickly to address political manipulation affecting countries such as the US, Taiwan, South Korea and Poland, while moving slowly or not at all on cases in Afghanistan, Iraq, Mongolia, Mexico and much of Latin America.
"There is a lot of harm being done on Facebook that is not being responded to because it is not considered enough of a PR risk to Facebook," said Sophie Zhang, a former data scientist at Facebook who worked within the company's "integrity" organization to combat inauthentic behavior. "The cost isn't borne by Facebook. It's borne by the broader world as a whole."
The investigation shows how Facebook has allowed major abuses of its platform in poor, small and non-western countries in order to prioritize addressing abuses that attract media attention or affect the US and other wealthy countries. The company acted quickly to address political manipulation affecting countries such as the US, Taiwan, South Korea and Poland, while moving slowly or not at all on cases in Afghanistan, Iraq, Mongolia, Mexico and much of Latin America.
"There is a lot of harm being done on Facebook that is not being responded to because it is not considered enough of a PR risk to Facebook," said Sophie Zhang, a former data scientist at Facebook who worked within the company's "integrity" organization to combat inauthentic behavior. "The cost isn't borne by Facebook. It's borne by the broader world as a whole."
Facebook is psychopath (Score:1)
How can PR have any effect?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How can PR have any effect?
"They trust me, the dumb fucks."
--Mark Zukerberg.
If people still trust facebook, nothing could ever break that trust.
distinction without a difference (Score:4, Insightful)
How is this any different than what they have been doing all along anyhow? It's just a different medium, but same behavior.
Re: (Score:1)
Well, consider this, if a company in the US was printing and distributing propaganda leaflets for a foreign government that was pushing it's citizens to carry out ethnic cleansing and massacre minority groups within that country, should that printing press be free of repercussions?
Because that's really what Facebook is doing, it's acting as the digital equivalent of a subcontracted propaganda outlet for these governments who are carrying out literal crimes against humanity. If this was the 1930s/1940s Faceb
It's not a loophole (Score:2)
What about voters (Score:2, Interesting)
Voters are the biggest idiots. There is a good chance that either and extreme leftist like Ocasio Cortez or a crazy right winger like Marjorie Taylor Greene would be elected to president at some point. Why? Because ultimately, the general public .. the average person .. is an idiot. No way around it. The constitution and the aristocracy system protected us for a while. Used to be you could not get popular distribution of your ideas without multiple people evaluating your work on some sort of merit. Nowaday
Re: What about voters (Score:1)
Re:What about voters (Score:5, Insightful)
Is AOC extreme left? I don't know much about her except all the usual idiots seem to really really hate her.
So I looked at her policies. Doesn't seem extreme left. Nothing about mass nationalization or any of that stuff. Single payer healthcare, sure, but that's barely left wing, it's about as mainstream an issue as it's possible to get.
Three words (Score:4, Informative)
Is AOC extreme left? I don't know much about her except all the usual idiots seem to really really hate her.
So I looked at her policies. Doesn't seem extreme left. Nothing about mass nationalization or any of that stuff. Single payer healthcare, sure, but that's barely left wing, it's about as mainstream an issue as it's possible to get.
Three words: Green New Deal.
Re:Three words (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Three words (Score:5, Insightful)
And most other democratic countries look at AOC (and the Democratic party) as someone slightly right of the center. I can only conclude that the Overton-window in the US has slid quite a great deal to the right to consider centrist to be extreme-left.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Part of the problem is the "left" party ceding ground at every turn. Biden's not even trying to get people healthcare, nor does he care about legalizing marijuana which would be a stupid-easy hit across party lines and with the meme crowd. His tax plan doesn't even restore the nominal corporate rates to where they were before Trump, much less fix the loopholes to have people actually pay that rate. He doesn't even articulate things well like Obama did. What the actual fuck?
For whatever reason, lots of peopl
Re: (Score:2)
It's never the what, it's always the how...
From the Washingon Bleep - 2/11/19, H.R. 109:
"Guaranteeing a job with a family-sustaining wage, adequate family and medical leave, paid vacations, and retirement security to all people of the United States."
A modicum of understanding economic theory could demonstrate the ludicrous foundation of such a proposal. Guaranteeing a job? Sounds like a recipe for destructive spending, well beyond what we are engaged in now. We need less, not more, of that.
"Providing all pe
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Green New Deal is pretty mainstream. Right of centre parties in Europe are implementing that kind of thing.
Business demands it, they don't want to get left behind with old technology.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
IMHO the entire thing is due to the Right falling into the "no true Scotsman" fallacy in a huge way. In all cases I've interacted with Republicans and Conservatives, they seem to think that anything that is not to the right of them is left wing. Essentially I think this means they are "insecure" about themselves and the righteousness of their beliefs. Needing to prove themselves, etc. Tilting at windmills, as it were, while the rest of the world has moved on.
Liberals and Democrats (not to be confused with t
Re: (Score:2)
upset about the competition. (Score:2, Insightful)
Theory (Score:3)
...while moving slowly or not at all on cases in Afghanistan, Iraq, Mongolia, Mexico and much of Latin America.
While I think they have no excuse for Mexico & Latin America, I suspect for places like Afghanistan and Mongolia, their AI has not been trained to understand those languages, and they likely lack the volume of fluent humans necessary to screen posts manually.
Re: (Score:2)
PROTIP: Facebook is NOT the world government! (Score:4, Interesting)
Also, the whole damn point of a leader is that he is the one who decides! That includes facing the "music" of having elected a shit leader.
It is not Facebook's job to elect your leader! It is yours!
What do you actually want?
To go back to a time where governments had control over the censorship in their country and ban every other country in the world that's rattling their own little propaganda reality distortion filter bubble and circle jerk?
Yes, China would love that too, if they hadn't blocked out your propaganda outlets much more effectively than "we" do theirs. (Because they got full totalitarianism... Oh how you wish you had that too, right?)
Is the big bad coalition of propaganda TLAs afraid of some incompetent and tiny competitors, or what?
Because: Welcome to the club! Now you know how we, the rest of the world, felt for the last 100 years, regarding America's biggest export. (Let's call it ... "culture". But "puppet dictators" works too.)
I'm sorry, we don't get to mute your leader, you don't get to mute ours. And it's not smart anyway to be ignorant towards your enemies' propaganda. It is usually more telling about them than about their targets. Like, say, This Fucking Article.
Re: PROTIP: Facebook is NOT the world government! (Score:1)
Not for want of trying
Re: (Score:1)
What I read: an article criticizing Facebook for handing shiny new tools to despots, which they are using to perpetuate abuse of their people.
What you read: I dunno, TimeCube?
Are you equating criticism of Facebook's role in maintaining the power of totalitarian governments with the US record of propping up dictators to exploit foreign populations for political goals? Because I'm pretty sure that is the single most batshit thing I have read on here in a while, and that is one hel
Re: (Score:1)
Also, the whole damn point of a leader is that he is the one who decides! That includes facing the "music" of having elected a shit leader. It is not Facebook's job to elect your leader! It is yours!
Assuming 100% of the population agree with being led, sure. Otherwise you're objectively oppressing them by electing anyone.
Re: (Score:1)
Wow (Score:2)
Facebook is just a glorified multiuser blog.
"World leaders" can already deceive and harass their citizens. It's kind of a perk of being a world leader, and they don't need a glorified multiuser blog to do it.
I wish mass hysteria could go back to being about tulip prices and "pyramid power" and harmless stuff like that.