Survey Says: Facebook Is a Problem
November 11, 2021
I believe everything I read on the Internet. I also have great confidence in surveys conducted by estimable news organizations. A double whammy for me was SSRS Research Refined CNN Study. You can read the big logo version at this link.
The survey reports that Facebook is a problem. Okay, who knew?
Here’s a snippet about the survey:
About one-third of the public — including 44% of Republicans and 27% of Democrats — say both that Facebook is making American society worse and that Facebook itself is more at fault than its users.
Delightful.
Stephen E Arnold, November 11, 2021
Reigning in Big Tech: Facebook May Be Free to Roam
November 10, 2021
I noted that Google was, in effect, not guilty of tracking Safari users. You can read the the UK court decision here. Sure, Google has to pay a $3 billion fine for abusing its control over search, but there are appeals in the future. Google can afford appeals and allow turnover in the EU staff to dull the knife that slices at Googzilla.
I found “Why the Rest of the World Shrugged at the Facebook Papers” more interesting. The main point of the write up is, “Meh, Facebook.” Here’s a passage I noted:
Even many in civil society have barely registered the leaks.
Facebook may be able to do some hand waving, issue apologetic statements, and keep on its current path. Advertisers and stakeholders are like to find the report cited above reassuring.
Interesting.
Stephen E Arnold, November 10, 2021
Meta: A Stroke of Genius or a Dropout Idea from a Dropout
November 10, 2021
I read an article called “Thoughts on Facebook Meta.” The main idea of the essay surprised me. Here’s the passage which caught my attention:
I think the metaverse will be massive not so much because gaming and VR will be big, but because gaming and VR will be the only avenue to thrive for the bottom 80% of people on the planet.
I also circled in red this passage:
Anyway, this is a smart move by Face-meta. It allows Zuckerberg to dodge the scrutiny bullets and become a quixotic futurist, and at the same time build the reality substrate for 80% of the planet.
Net net: The Zuck does it again. He likes old-school barbeque sauce, not New Coke. The question is, “What will government regulators like?”
Stephen E Arnold, November 10, 2021
Facebook: Who Sees Disturbing Content?
November 4, 2021
Time, now an online service owned by Salesforce founders, published “Why Some People See More Disturbing Content on Facebook Than Others, According to Leaked Documents.”
The user categories exposed to more troubling Facebook content are, according to Facebook’s researchers:
vulnerable communities, including Black, elderly and low-income users, are among the groups most harmed by the prevalence of disturbing content on the site. At the time of the 2019 integrity report, Facebook’s researchers were still defining what constituted disturbing.
Interesting.
Stephen E Arnold, November 4, 2021
Facebook under the Meta Umbrella May Be a Teddy Bear
November 2, 2021
Facebook (oops, Meta) appears to be changing now that it is under the Meta umbrella. “Facebook Will Let Kazakhstan Government Directly Flag Content the Country Deems Harmful” reports:
Facebook owner Meta Platforms has granted the Kazakh government access to its content reporting system, after the Central Asian nation threatened to block the social network for millions of local users.
Will Kazakhstan be a pace-setter like China and Russia when it comes to country specific censorship? If Facebook (oops, Meta) finds that TikTok and other non-Zuck properties do not appeal to young people, Facebook (oops, Meta) will have to trade off its long-cherished policies for deals that generate revenue.
Money is the pressure point which caused Facebook (oops, Meta) to indicate that it has a kinder, gentler side. What other countries will want to embrace the warm and fuzzy social media giant’s alleged new approach?
Stephen E Arnold, November 2, 2021
The Zuck Strikes Back
November 2, 2021
Well, when Facebook strikes back it probably won’t use words. A few threshold modifications, a handful of key words (index terms), and some filter tweaking — – the target will be in for an exciting time. Try explaining why your Facebook page is replete with links to Drug X and other sporty concepts. Yeah, wow.
“Mark Zuckerberg angrily Insists Facebook Is the Real Victim Here” includes some interesting observations:
At the top of his company’s third quarter earnings call, the Facebook CEO broadly railed against the 17 news organizations working together to report on a massive trove of leaked internal documents dubbed the Facebook Papers.
Okay, victim.
What could Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp do to make life difficult for bylined journalists digging through the company’s confidential-no-more content.
My DarkCyber research team offered some ideas at lunch today. I just listened and jotted notes on a napkin. Here we go:
- Populate a journalist’s Facebook page with content related to human trafficking, child sex crime, contraband, etc.
- Inject images which are typically banned from online distribution into a journalist’s Instagram content. What no Instagram? Just use Facebook data to locate a relative or friend and put the imagery on one or more of those individuals’ Instagram. That would have some knock on consequences.
- Recycle WhatsApp messages from interesting WhatsApp groups to a journalist’s WhatsApp posts; for example, controlled substances, forbidden videos on Dark Web repositories, or some of those sites offering fraudulent Covid vaccination cards, false identification papers, or Fullz (stolen financial data).
Facebook has some fascinating data, and it can be repurposed. I assume the journalists spending time with the company’s documents are aware of what hypothetically Facebook could do if Mr. Zuckerberg gets really angry and becomes – what’s the word – how about vindictive?
How will investigators get access to these hypothetical poisoned data? Maybe one of the specialized services which index social media content?
Stephen E Arnold, November 2, 2021
A Great Idea: New Coke
November 1, 2021
I don’t think too much about companies changing their names. The reason is that brand shifts are a response to legal or financial woes. I may have to start paying more attention if I read analyses like “From Facebook to Meta: The Most Notable Company Rebrands.” Wow.
The article identifies name changes which emphasize the underlying desire to create distance between one name and a new, free floating moniker. The goal is no baggage and a lift to the beleaguered executives MBA-inspired strategic insights.
USA Today mentions Tronc. That is a name that flows trippingly on the tongue. The newspaper with color pictures points out that Andersen Consulting morphed into Accenture and then demonstrated that CPAs can make quite poor business decisions about how to report a client’s financial condition. Think Enron. Do you remember Jeffrey Skilling, who has a Harvard MBA and was a real, live Baker scholar. Impressive. He was able to explain bookkeeping to Andersen/Accenture. Good job! The must-read newspaper mentioned a cigarette outfit which became the Altria outfit. Think processed cheese, not nicotine delivery.
But the write up is about Facebook, which is now “meta.” I think “meta” is a subtle move. No one will know the difference, just like Coca Cola’s push of New Coke. Brilliant.
Stephen E Arnold, November 1, 2021
Facebook: A Fascinating Assertion
October 28, 2021
A Facebook professional named Monika Bickert, who is the “head” of global policy management is quoted as offering some insight into the Zuckbook’s approach to content. This information comes from “Facebook Exec Pushes Back on Whistleblower Claims,” published by US News & World Report, which I did not know was still in business.
Monika Bickert, Facebook’s head of global policy management, says the social media giant does not prioritize engagement and user growth over safety.
Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion.
The write up states:
Facebook has pushed back on Haugen’s claims but hasn’t pointed to any factual errors in her testimony or in a series of reports that outlined massive shortcomings at the social network, identified by its own internal research.
The write up is an interview with the “head” of global policy management, and I found her summary of her background interesting; for example, the article quotes her as saying:
We do not and we have not prioritized engagement over safety. I’ve been at this company for more than nine years. I’m a mother. I also was a criminal prosecutor and worked on child safety for more than 10 years. And I can tell you I wouldn’t be at this company if we weren’t prioritizing safety.
The implication is that a former criminal prosecutor would know what algorithms are up to 24×7. I am not sure I am 100 percent confident in this “head’s” ability to address message amplification, the interaction of user inputs and content outputs, or the unexpected signals smart software makes available to other platform components.
How do I know this?
- Google knee jerked and dumped staff who were poking around the behavior of the vaunted Snorkel method
- Twitter said in effect, “Hey, we don’t know why certain messages are augmented. Mystery, right? Let’s grab a latte and do some thinking.”
- The interesting “drift” which manifests itself when Bayesian centric systems like the venerable Autonomy neuro linguistic programming black box chugs away. Retrain or get some fascinating outputs.
Your mileage may vary, but in lawyer speak, Facebook is nothing but a bunch of great folks producing outstanding products.
Believe that?
I don’t.
Stephen E Arnold, October 28, 2021
Facebook: Making Money Is Job Two. Keeping Facebook on Top of Social Media Is Job One
October 27, 2021
Facebook cannot catch a break, but it is the company’s own fault. Information about Facebook’s nefarious actions keep surfacing, but the social network platform has not destroyed itself just yet. The Jacobin details how “Facebook Harms Its Users Because That’s Where Its Profits Are” and why the company is such a “nice” place.
Facebook has many benefits related to communication, news publishing, and economic activity, but another way to describe it is as an addictive, social media platform with greedy goals. Former Facebook employee Francis Haugen leaked internal documents about Facebook’s harmful activities. The Wall Street Journal did a news series on the leak, 60 Minutes interviewed Haugen, and she testified in front of Congress. All this attention pointed to the fact that Facebook purposely knows its social media platform is dangerous, but does not fix the issues because it would harm their bottom line.
Facebook employees have suggested solutions, but they are ignored. There is a simpler solution that is already taking affect:
“If a firm is publicly owned or simply a tightly regulated utility, it doesn’t need to work under the capitalist logic of growth and excessive profit seeking that’s fueled these issues, nor does it have to survive if its user base no longer needs or cares for it. The fact that the company is going out of fashion with the youth and is predominantly used by people over thirty might be a problem for Mark Zuckerberg, private owner of Facebook, but it’s not much of an issue for a utility that a government reluctantly nationalized because of how much its users came to depend on it. In fact, it sounds like a readymade solution for a platform that most of us agree is, at best, addicting and unhealthy.”
The rest of the article explains ways that Facebook cold be monitored, but it would lead to censorship. Another suggestion was for people to reduce the amount of exposure to technology.
Facebook created this tiny glitch. The other hitch in the social media giant’s git along is giving certain questionable actors a big megaphone. In the past, these political and intellectual influencers shared their opinions but were contained to a less digitally empowered corner of wonkiness. It is time for politicians and activists to step up and demand accountability. Facebook, however, is a company with a lot of money and that goes further in Washington DC than good intentions.
Whitney Grace, October 27, 2021
Facebook Tip: The Company Has Power
October 26, 2021
The sharks are circling the social media world’s favorite chum. In the meantime, here’s a tip.
The revelations from whistleblower Frances Haugen did not surprise us, but it is good to see them in the open. The former Facebook data scientist testified that Facebook actively puts profits above user safety. The more users scroll and click, the more the company can push tailored ads and the more money it makes. Since harmful and polarizing content gets more attention, Facebook is motivated to keep that content in circulation. A safer algorithm, attested Haugen, would have gotten in the way of those profits. (Naturally, Mark Zuckerberg denied her testimony.)
While we wait to see what, if any, changes the platform will be forced to make, BGR describes how users can wrest control of their accounts from the algorithm. Writer Chris Smith declares that “Facebook Is Terrified that You’ll Learn this News Feed Secret.” It is a process that may take some time, though there was briefly a Chrome extension to automate it. We learn:
“Louis Barclay’s ‘Unfollow Everything’ tool automated the entire process, allowing users to unfollow their friends and pages. Just like that, the tool cleared the News Feed, helping people spend less time inside the app. If you unfollow everyone, the algorithm has nothing to feed on. It won’t know what to serve you. Then, you can start from scratch and only follow important people. Your News Feed experience will improve dramatically as a result. Barclay explained in a post on Slate that unfollowing people isn’t like unfriending. You remain friends with people. You just won’t follow their posts and have them all dumped into your News Feed. Then, you’ll be able to follow only the people you want. ‘I still remember the feeling of unfollowing everything for the first time,’ he said. ‘It was near-miraculous. I had lost nothing since I could still see my favorite friends and groups by going to them directly. But I had gained a staggering amount of control. I was no longer tempted to scroll down an infinite feed of content. The time I spent on Facebook decreased dramatically. Overnight, my Facebook addiction became manageable.’”
Facebook refused to allow such a cure to spread, however. The company threatened Barclay with legal action if he did not remove the Chrome extension. It also permanently disabled his Facebook and Instagram accounts, which seems rather petty. Barclay must have hit a nerve.
Cynthia Murrell, October 26, 2021
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
