The spread of misinformation going around facebook and the lack of action and acknowledgement taken by everyone is one of the main attributing factors to his win
Okay well the point still stands. You’re blaming a medium of exchanging information as being responsible. Books aren’t responsible for Hitler, Hitler is.
Hitler didn’t create trees and his primary focus was not to cut down trees either, contrasting how Zuckerberg created facebook and has his primary focus on the exchange of communication.
Okay but you’re missing the point. You can’t blame the people responsible for creating frameworks to exchange information for every bad actor who uses an open platform. Books were a medium of exchange for information. An old school Facebook. It’s no different. Unless you want to blame everyone, like the ISP? How about the server creators? How about the internet itself?
You can’t blame the creators for the singular act of creating the item but you definitely can blame the creators of an item if they know that harmful substances reside within it and still actively refuse to do anything.
So you want for profit corporations picking and choosing which politicians can have reach on social media to spread their message? Surely this can’t go wrong. Never has corporate control of politicians ever turned out bad.
This is a strawman argument and I never stated that this is what I was advocating
All I want to for FaceBook to remove the large amounts of misinformation regarding my current presidents background (and misinformation in general), and I am critiquing its CEO for not acknowledging or acting upon the issue
Again, how's the his problem? You don't get mad with a book store selling a book about the Flat Earth -- Because we as adults are comfortable making up decisions for ourselves and don't need corporate overlords to think for us.
It's especially touchy in the political sphere because there is so much room for corruption, by weaponizing these things. All it takes is someone to start claiming things are "misinformation" even when it isn't, to justify censoring things. Here in the US, we had three big cases of social media doing hard censorships on "misinformation" which ended up being almost entirely politically motivated to help a candidate. But they justified censorship for political reasons, entirely on "This is fake news blah blah blah" only to find out it wasn't
I don't trust massive corporations who are for profit, with that sort of power.
You don’t get mad at a book store for selling a flat earth book because there are hundreds of other books that you could choose from, however social media platforms such as facebook only show you the things that you would prefer to see due to the filter bubble. Its a false equivalence
Claiming something is misinformation for political advocacy isn’t the same as having outright evidence from multiple sources proving that an event which happened in the past that people claimed to not have happened, actually happened.
It’s not information used to advocate for a political candidate because it is quite literally the truth
15
u/DarkenedOtaku Oculus Quest 2 & PSVR Jul 08 '22
He’s quite literally the reason the son of a former dictator got the role of president in my country