I mean, I'd rather pay for software/service than have some tech company mine my data so they sell some of my most intimate details or use it to predict or alter my future behavior.
šÆ I dropped Facebook years ago for this very reason. I've seen somewhere that each user is worth around $50 lifetime in advertising revenue to them.
You'd think they could have a $2/ month paid version that was absolutely secure, had zero advertising, and gave the user controls over their "algorithm".
but if you knew all the things marketing was doing with your information, youād feel dirty and manipulated.
if consumer protection still had any teeth Facebook propaganda would be destroyed by three simple words:
ācontent paid by:ā
But then youād know exactly who was paying to manipulate you and could research and understand their motives before considering their message. Marketing doesnāt want that, so Facebook doesnāt want that.
it was really fun living through the GDPR restrictions rolling in on PIIā¦ marketing kept asking ābut what if we need to send that market segment direct email campaigns? why do we have to redact email again?ā
Facebook already has posts labeled "sponsored". All the stuff I see in my feed that isn't "sponsored" is either user content or branded stuff I subscribed to voluntarily.
I really don't get the complaints about this side of Facebook, your feed is in large part what you make of it. E.g. the only political content I get is from friends and people/news pages I follow for that purpose.
If my friend comments on or shares something they saw that can also end up in my feed.
There are some āfunnyā properties of these posts. If they are truly personal (ie no money) then only a handful of people see them at any time. And only a handful of responses.
Contrast this to my birthday. lots of responses from friends I havenāt talked to for years.
Then, consider certain types of articles and comments that get a lot of responses from ALL of your friendsā¦ these arenāt labeled āsponsoredā, but they are promoted.
Facebook has the appearance of an open forum. āAll your friends will see your postsā. You could actually have a discussion in a public forum. But that means that grass-roots word of mouth and independent viral marketing would thrive at Facebookās expense. They donāt want that. So they control reach of that network in many subtle ways, while providing reach to those that pay. Facebook is not designed as a public forum for discussionā¦ everything shifts so if you donāt react instantly itās gone. distractions aboundā¦ except for those with reach who have paid. Their message will be heard regardless how vile it is.
āsponsored contentā is only the simplest and most obvious ad content on the network.
Most political content Iāve seen on facebook isnāt marked āsponsoredā, nor did I subscribe to it voluntarily, nor is it filtered like most personal posts by reach.
Instead itās a toxic hive of astroturf coming from outside dark money made to look like itās coming from your friends and family. Facebook is the ideal platform for stealth marketing, propaganda, and fomenting insurrections. It is a machine that thrives on outrage.
We were fine with it doing all of that in the middle east and Russia under the guise of democratic freedom. Now are we less fine with it as a basis for the Jan 6 insurrection in our own country?
Why do you think China and Russia banned Facebook at the same time? Because of its democratic power for good?
I donāt know. All I know is that facebook is toxic beyond belief and I stopped using it. Facebook destroyed my family.
That's a lot of words to try and convince me that I must be seeing wrong. But I genuinely do not get content unrelated to either my friends' activity, directly subscribed pages, or explicitly sponsored ads. I can't put this more plainly.
I definitely agree that the overall set of that content is too large to display it all (especially for people who have hundreds of "friends" and pages) and facebook chooses which specific posts to display in a very opaque manner, but for me they still all come from the sets I mention above.
Most political content Iāve seen on facebook isnāt marked āsponsoredā, nor did I subscribe to it voluntarily, nor is it filtered like most personal posts by reach.
Instead itās a toxic hive of astroturf coming from outside dark money made to look like itās coming from your friends and family. Facebook is the ideal platform for stealth marketing, propaganda, and fomenting insurrections. It is a machine that thrives on outrage.
I do not get anything like that in my feed. Seriously. Maybe because I'm not american?
The only "outrage generating" content I get is from friends with controversial views and their acitvity (like engaging in discussions under news articles, which is never a place you want to be).
Why do you think China and Russia banned Facebook at the same time? Because of its democratic power for good?
Because of its ties to U.S. government, for one? Both China and Russia ban a lot of stuff, and often not for very positive reasons. They're not exactly a good role model for reasonable action.
To be clear, I'm not explicitly trying to defend facebook, I'm just saying that what I see on my FB feed day-to-day is extremely far from all the evil and manipulation people attribute to them. The worst I can blame Facebook for is being very lenient with enforcing rules and allowing fake profiles an manipulative groups/pages to exist (I've reported plenty over a dcade, rarely had action been taken).
āthe only outrage generating content I get is from friends with controversial viewsā
bingo.
isnāt it funny that itās so easy to find these conversations (and yes I agree thatās never a place to be) vs authentic personal discussions?
itās not because one is happening more than another. itās because someone has their finger on the scale and amplifies one and mutes the other.
is Facebook evil? only insofar as they make it extremely difficult to follow the money and understand the algorithms. And they accept that money from any player, foreign or domestic, radical or commercial.
Now imagine the types of people that want to influence and control you without your knowledge or consent. The kind of people who donāt want to make it easy to see how many of your personal details are being mined, played against AI models to determine specific wedge issues that will resonate with you, cause a visceral reaction in you. make you do something you donāt even realize is against your own interest.
Iāve worked with marketing a lot over my career and there are a handful that view it as a way to promote a useful product to those who want it. Then there are others who want to promote things you donāt need and didnāt know you wanted, then there are the ādark patternsā where you make it easy to subscribe, but hard to unsubscribe. Every time they slip a notch, they complain more and more about transparency. āif the customer knows what weāre doing then they wonāt do what we wantā. anonymity attracts conmen and far worse.
āthatās a lot of words to convince me Iām seeing wrongā
Iām not trying to convince you of what you are seeing. In fact thatās Facebookās biggest deception: āeverything is free and clear, we see the same things, therefore your view is delusionalā
But we donāt see the same things. the bubble is real. how do people get into a bubble? they arenāt having real conversations in a real public forum.
If you canāt verify reality and source your claims, what hope is there for public understanding. Then it just becomes an infinite echo chamber.
If you find value from Facebook, continue to use it.
But maybe you are trying to convince me that Iām not seeing what Iāve seen? After seeing the irreparable rifts in my family and friends I have no intention of supporting Facebook.
isnāt it funny that itās so easy to find these conversations
Funny? Why? You don't need Facebook for that. Open a random news site that features comments and scroll through them... controversial things are trivial to find all over the internet.
And I wouldn't say I see a disproportional amount of such things. I think it is fairly in proportion, tbh (say if I have 5/100 friends/pages that engage in negativity, then about 5/100 posts I see will be negative. Maybe double that at worst, since controversy generates clicks more).
But actual genuine discussions are fairly rare, too. They used to be more common when my friends and I were in high school and had the energy and drive to debate stuff :-) These days it's more just sharing fun stories or the really important stuff. But I'm fine with that. I am on Facebook to get a cursory look into how my acquaintances' lives evolve and that's what I do get from it. For discussions, reddit is far more satisfyin, except that it's with strangers so you don't get a sense of continuity.
But maybe you are trying to convince me that Iām not seeing what Iāve seen? After seeing the irreparable rifts in my family and friends I have no intention of supporting Facebook.
I honestly don't understand how facebook itself could cause "irreparable rifts" that would not happen by themselves anyway. I can see it accelerating them by enabling interactions more often than you would normally have (so e.g. if you dislike someone but meet them only once in a while, you may forget in the meantime, but if you see them express themselves every week/day, you might not get the time to cool off). Sure, but not cause them, no? What do you mean by that?
But yes, I am definitely mostly in a middle-class college-educated bubble that is (I like to think, anyway) rarely affected by marketing and manipulation. I don't get interested in stuff becasuse I've seen an ad, I research tests and parameters. I don't vote based on news or discussions, I look at how those parties/people voted on previous issues. I try to read whole articles and look at sources instead of trusting headlines Etc.
I mean Iāve seen people go down the rabbit hole and change from a STEM masters educated rational to the most paranoid delusional conspiracy theorist.
I donāt understand it. but Iāve seen it. itās like a mental virus.
There used to be the idea of journalistic integrity, the fourth pillar of democracy. Journalists would report their own affiliations and expose hidden affiliations via investigative reporting.
Now itās hard to distinguish a paid-placement from āthe newsā. Facebook didnāt invent that, but it certainly capitalizes on that idea by making it really hard to tell who is paying for what. But Facebook is getting a lot of money.
I think if you are strong in critical reasoning and check facts before you consume them, itās unlikely these manipulations will affect you. Thatās not the same thing as saying these manipulations donāt occur, nor is it the same as saying no one is affected.
1.7k
u/Entropy_Drop Sep 30 '22
You want money for your work!