1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Facebook leaves no doubt: It's the right wing's social network now - Part One

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by Deckard, Oct 31, 2019.

  1. Deckard

    Deckard Blade Runner
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2002
    Messages:
    50,513
    Likes Received:
    23,591
    Billions of people are both participating in and being exposed to Facebook, and the vast majority have no idea what's going on behind the scenes. Everyone should read this.

    Part One:

    [​IMG]

    BY MATT BINDER
    17 HOURS AGO

    Facebook, a social network originally founded as an Ivy League version of Hot or Not, has billions of users and the power to sway elections. In the U.S., where nearly 70 percent of adults are Facebook users, its recent choices make it clear where the company stands: with the party of Donald Trump.

    On the day that the company rolled out one of its biggest new products, the Facebook News tab, founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg decided the place he wanted to be on launch day was a media event co-hosted by News Corp.

    There, Zuckerberg and News Corp. chief executive Robert Thomson spent an hour yucking it up and reminiscing about old times spent with Thomson’s boss, Rupert Murdoch, who also owns Fox News.

    During a short Q&A, Zuckerberg was finally forced to address why the right-wing rag Breitbart was included as an official Facebook news partner.



    The Facebook CEO defended the decision. Zuckerberg consistently described the News tab as dedicated to curating “high-quality news” as if repeating this over and over again somehow qualified Breitbart — a far-right website that features a “Black Crime” category and employed Milo Yiannopoulos, who used his position to harass people and promote white nationalists — as a legitimate news source.

    Days later, Campbell Brown, head of Facebook's news partnerships, shared a piece on the site from the News Corp.-owned Wall Street Journal’s editorial board, which is notoriously more conservative than the rest of the paper.

    The op-ed defends Facebook’s inclusion of sites like Breitbart as proof the social media company is being fair and balanced. The Wall Street Journal, which is one of the lucky Facebook News partners to get paid, goes so far as to say the far-right outlet Breitbart is evened out by the inclusion of mainstream corporate media outlets like CNN, as if they represent equivalent ends of the political spectrum.

    Brown added a blurb of her own in her Facebook post.

    “I strongly believe it should be the role of the press to dissect the truth or lies found in political ads - not engineers at a tech company,” Brown writes, unaware that she is fundamentally misunderstanding that her employer’s fact-checking program is performed by third-party outlets and journalists, not Facebook’s programmers.

    One such Facebook-approved fact checker is The Daily Caller, a website founded by Fox News’ Tucker Carlson that has a habit of hiring white supremacists.

    Not that politicians have to worry about fact-checking — at least when it comes to their ads. In the name of “free speech,” Facebook announced that lawmakers could lie in political advertisements, a policy that should help Donald Trump, who has already spread false information in ads about Joe Biden.

    When Mark Zuckerberg was pressed on these new rules by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez at a recent congressional hearing, Zuckerberg demurred on specific examples of what sort of disinformation is allowed on the platform. However, the Facebook CEO made it clear that the company shouldn’t be policing political speech.

    Except, of course, when it wants to. Adriel Hampton, the founder of a left-wing PAC, set out to test Zuckerberg’s rules. After his group’s false Green New Deal ads were removed, he filed to run as a gubernatorial candidate in California.

    For all intents and purposes, Hampton is now officially a politician. Well, not according to Facebook.

    “This person has made clear he registered as a candidate to get around our policies, so his content, including ads, will continue to be eligible for third-party fact-checking,” the company said in a statement to CNN.

    Facebook has now apparently authorized itself to decide who is and isn’t a legitimate politician.

    Further proving Facebook’s bias is a recent investigation by Popular Information, a political newsletter started by Judd Legum, the founder of the shuttered progressive news outlet ThinkProgress. Legum discovered that The Daily Wire, the media outlet founded by conservative pundit Ben Shapiro, was breaking Facebook’s policies to spread its content across the platform.

    The investigation found a coordinated network of large right-wing Facebook Pages spamming The Daily Wire links, and only The Daily Wire links. Facebook normally deems this kind of activity "inauthentic coordinated behavior," which is against its policies. As recently as last year, Facebook banned hundreds of left-leaning pages for this very thing.

    However, Facebook declined to take action against The Daily Wire when it was approached with this information.

    Link to Part Two:

    http://bbs.clutchfans.net/index.php...al-network-now-part-two.302069/#post-12689026
     
    #1 Deckard, Oct 31, 2019
    Last edited: Nov 1, 2019
  2. jiggyfly

    jiggyfly Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2015
    Messages:
    10,945
    Likes Received:
    9,489
    While I don't agree with what Facebook is doing, that title is pretty inflammatory and the article does not really back it up.

    How exactly does this make them right wing and not just extreme capitalist?
     
    dachuda86 likes this.
  3. Rocketman1981

    Rocketman1981 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2009
    Messages:
    1,495
    Likes Received:
    580
    Facebook is a collection of its users interactions and views. Stop trying to control companies and force them to adhere to
    your totalitarian viewpoint about everything.

    What is ironic is that liberal ideas used to want to hear different viewpoints. Now its use the power of the government to
    stymie those who we don't agree with.

    I'm a champion of allowing everyone to say what they want and allowing a diversity of ideas and news.
     
  4. Deckard

    Deckard Blade Runner
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2002
    Messages:
    50,513
    Likes Received:
    23,591
    Did you read part two? Yes, it is inflammatory. Zuckerberg's decision making and behavior with regard to our politics and how he is handling politics on Facebook are also inflammatory. Inflammatory and damning, in my opinion.
     
    FrontRunner likes this.
  5. jiggyfly

    jiggyfly Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2015
    Messages:
    10,945
    Likes Received:
    9,489
    I agree that what Zuckerberg is doing is inflammatory but why say its right wing to illustrate that.

    Is he favoring one side or the other or is he just doing it for monetary reasons.

    Just because something is bad or you don't agree with it in practice it does not mean it's right wing.
     
  6. Deckard

    Deckard Blade Runner
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2002
    Messages:
    50,513
    Likes Received:
    23,591
    I agree that the title is inflammatory. It's their title, not mine. However, I think it's clear that, whatever Zuckerberg's reasoning, what the guy is doing is favoring one political party over another. The guy is a billionaire. How much money does he need? Zuckerberg is allowing fake, right-wing propaganda to plaster itself all over the major social media site in this country. That's putting aside that it is influencing how the world views us. I applaud what Twitter is doing. In my opinion, Facebook should do the same thing. If they can't prevent hate speech from whatever side, presented as "real news," then they should stop making money off of all of it.

    Facebook is no different than a newspaper that leans one way politically. What makes it different is the platform. People are being bombarded with vicious lies and if they aren't widely read people who view a variety of news sources, like some of us are, they think it's the truth. Facebook isn't The Huffington Post, a type of newspaper online that leans Left and is obvious about it, or The Federalist, a right leaning news and opinion source that makes no bones about leaning that way. No, it is seen by its users as something else entirely. Again, if Facebook cannot control the targeted vicious fake "news" it is getting paid to put out there, some of it produced by countries that are trying to influence our elections for their benefit, they shouldn't accept any of it. In my opinion.
     
  7. jiggyfly

    jiggyfly Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2015
    Messages:
    10,945
    Likes Received:
    9,489
    I agree with everything you said about Facebook except for the fact that it's clear political favoring.

    I don't think they care as long as you can pay them.
     
    pgabriel likes this.
  8. pgabriel

    pgabriel Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    40,109
    Likes Received:
    2,082
    How Facebook chooses partners is probably heavily influenced on how many followers that entity has. Facebook is a business like you're saying, its just a business decision.

    People who follow Breitbart are already right wing. Facebook doesn't want to alienate any of its users
     
  9. CometsWin

    CometsWin Breaker Breaker One Nine
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2000
    Messages:
    28,028
    Likes Received:
    13,012
    Stumping for white supremacy is now "allowing a diversity of ideas and news". You guys are hilarious.

    I deleted Facebook years ago. Facebook is the death of privacy and we're all doing our part to kill it.
     
    Deckard, mdrowe00 and RayRay10 like this.
  10. dmoneybangbang

    Joined:
    May 5, 2012
    Messages:
    13,418
    Likes Received:
    5,563
    Nothing to back this up... but I would imagine Facebook's demographic has been trending older and therefore has been targeted by conservatives. It would seem conservatives thrive in places where conspiracies reign king and facts shouldn't get in the way.
     
    jiggyfly likes this.
  11. Ubiquitin

    Ubiquitin Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2001
    Messages:
    12,308
    Likes Received:
    5,495
    Facebook is epitome of surveillance capitalism. I quit Facebook and Instagram years ago because of the ethics of the company. They could be the liberal saviors and I’d still feel the same way.
     
    CometsWin, Deckard, RayRay10 and 3 others like this.
  12. jcf

    jcf Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,189
    Likes Received:
    2,268
    So, what criteria should be used in determining what is ok for Facebook to include on its news tab? And who do you think should decide/enforce it?
     
  13. FranchiseBlade

    FranchiseBlade Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    42,935
    Likes Received:
    10,592
    Facebook isn't alone in allowing advertising which may be truthful. There was the whole bogus Swiftboat campaign against John Kerry that was carried on major news networks that were false. There were ads in newspapers, magazines, and websites as well.

    I think you run into sever censorship issues when you ask networks, or any media generating network to determine what qualifies as truthful or not. I think the most we could hope for would be for these sites/networks to determine if the origin of the content comes from foreign adversaries and perhaps put an end to that. Even that is risky.

    I'm absolutely anti-censorship and pro-free speech.

    Obviously, I don't like false news stories of any kind. But expecting every single carrier of content to fact check every single ad is opening things up to a huge amount of abuse and expense. Websites might be more lenient on grading the truth for higher-paying clients than others.
     
    CometsWin and pgabriel like this.
  14. Deckard

    Deckard Blade Runner
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2002
    Messages:
    50,513
    Likes Received:
    23,591
    If it's a political ad, don't accept it. If "news" is clearly "trumped up," and to use a word beloved by Mr trump's ardent followers, "fake," don't allow it. Facebook has made it clear that "anything goes." Who does that benefit? The answer is easy, and I don't mean @Easy. ;-)
     
    FranchiseBlade and Easy like this.
  15. Andre0087

    Andre0087 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    4,547
    Likes Received:
    6,124
    I'm more concerned with all the bots I see on social media. I can't go to a Youtube video without the comments just being outrageous along with the like/dislike ratio but hey they Russians haven't, aren't, and won't interfere in our elections so I think we'll be okay. Something will eventually have to be done about this to preserve our Republic.
     
  16. dmoneybangbang

    Joined:
    May 5, 2012
    Messages:
    13,418
    Likes Received:
    5,563
    Does Facebook even require who is paying for the ads like on tv commercials that are political ads? I have no idea.
     

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now