Facebook and Twitter: Battle Platforms
February 16, 2018
Social media is, according to an analysis by Lt. Col Jarred Prier (USAF), is a component of information warfare. “Commanding the Trend: Social Media As Information Warfare” explains how various actions can function as a lever for action and ideas. Highly recommended. The analysis suggests that social media is more than a way to find a companion and keep up with the kids.
Stephen E Arnold, February 16, 2018
EU Considers Making Platforms Pay for News Content
February 13, 2018
European journalists are sick of giant internet companies profiting from their labor without recompense, we learn from Yahoo News’ article, “Net Giants ‘Must Pay for News’ From Which They Make Billions.” The declaration from nine press agencies comes in support of a proposed EU directive that would require companies like Facebook, Google, and Twitter to pay for the articles that bring so much ad revenue to their platforms. The write-up shares part of the agencies’ plea:
Facebook has become the biggest media in the world,” the agencies said in a plea published in the French daily Le Monde. “Yet neither Facebook nor Google have a newsroom… They do not have journalists in Syria risking their lives, nor a bureau in Zimbabwe investigating Mugabe’s departure, nor editors to check and verify information sent in by reporters on the ground. Access to free information is supposedly one of the great victories of the internet. But it is a myth,” the agencies argued. “At the end of the chain, informing the public costs a lot of money.
News, the declaration added, is the second reason after catching up on family and friends for people to log onto Facebook, which tripled its profits to $10 billion (€8.5 billion) last year. Yet it is the giants of the net who are reaping vast profits “from other people’s work” by soaking up between 60 and 70 percent of advertising revenue, with Google’s jumping by a fifth in a year. Meanwhile, ad revenue for news media fell nine percent in France alone last year, “a disaster for the industry”.
Indeed it is. And, we are reminded, a robust press is crucial for democracy itself. Some attempts have been made in France, Germany, and Spain to obtain compensation from these companies, but the limited results were disappointing. The press agencies suggest granting journalists “related rights” copyrights and assure a concerned Parliament that citizens will still be able to access information for free online. The only difference, they insist, would be that an appropriate chunk of that ad revenue will go to the people who actually researched and created the content. That sounds reasonable to this writer.
Cynthia Murrell, February 13, 2018
Facebook: A Tracking Super Power?
February 12, 2018
One person on the DarkCyber research team called my attention to Hacker news post 16339088. (Be aware that some Hacker News items can become hard to find if the ID does not resolve.)
The post is about Facebook crawling every page recorded by its tracking pixel. If you want to know more about tracking pixels, this link may be useful.
Beyond Search and DarkCyber do not have a dog in this fight. However, the individual posting the assertion “Facebook crawls every page recorded by its tracking pixel” generated some interesting comments.
The DarkCyber researcher noted these, which may or may not be actual factual. Only the Facebook, like the Shadow, knows.
- Maybe Facebook does not crawl?
- Tracking takes place with “Like” buttons
- Facebook uses link prefetching
- Avoid using Facebook trackers
- Facebook does and does not observe robots.txt instructions
- “Shady tracking techniques”
- “Facebot crawler will crawl _every_ url that was recorded by their tracking pixel”
What’s correct? What’s incorrect?
Facebook often has useful information for those who have access to that information. Outside the US, some government authorities find Facebook data interesting and highly desirable to access in some investigations.
Stephen E Arnold, January 12, 2018
Facebook Is Making People Depressed. We Are Socially Sad
January 29, 2018
As anyone who has spent even a moment on social media knows, jealousy and depression are practically part of the algorithm. Seeing others’ success and happiness tends to put us in a funk, no matter how hard we try not to look. Turns out, this is a pretty common reaction as we discovered after reading a recent Phys.org piece, “A Secret History of Facebook Depression.”
The story tells us what we pretty much already know:
“If the research is any indication, you may actually be finding Facebook and other social media sites aren’t so great for your mental health. Instead of feeling blissfully open and connected with your friends, you feel inadequate or maybe even a bit depressed.”
Yep, that sounds about like our usual experience seeing an amazing family vacation photo by an ex, or news of another promotion by your enemy at work. It turns out the youngest generation is actually ahead of the rest of the world on this one. According to the Independent, millennials are leaving social media and finding quite a bit of happiness in the process. The tricky part is taking advice from 20-somethings in order to overcome the destructive side effects of social media. The bright side is that the approach spins cash.
Patrick Roland, January 29, 2018
Facebook and Google: An Easy Shift from Regulated to Menace
January 26, 2018
I read “George Soros: Facebook and Google a Menace to Society.” I thought the prevailing sentiment was regulation. Many industries are regulated, and some which should be like consulting are not.
The British newspaper which is popular in Harrod’s Creek for its digital commitment and its new chopped down form factor offered this nugget from George Soros, an interesting billionaire:
Facebook and Google have become “obstacles to innovation” and are a “menace” to society whose “days are numbered”, said billionaire investor and philanthropist George Soros at the World Economic Forum in Davos on Thursday. “Mining and oil companies exploit the physical environment; social media companies exploit the social environment,” said the Hungarian-American businessman, according to a transcript of his speech.
Let’s assume that Mr. Soros’ viewpoint grabs the hearts and minds of his fellow travelers. Will Facebook and Google face actions which are more than mere regulatory harnesses?
Not even good old Microsoft warranted the “menace” label. I think of menace as a word suggesting physical harm. Other definitions range from “a declaration of an intention to cause evil to happen” to scare, startle, or terrify.
Now Facebook and Google can be characterized in many ways. When we disseminate links to Facebook’s intellectual underbelly, none of the goslings is particularly frightened. When one of the DarkCyber researchers to I run a query on the GOOG, our blood does not run cold. We sigh, and run the same query on different systems, even www.searx.me which is often quite useful.
In my opinion, the PR stakes are rising for these superstars of the Silicon Valley way.
This will be interesting. Perhaps Philz Coffee fueled protests will become more common in Plastic Fantasticland. Could some wealthy Davos types fund such gatherings? The T shirts could become collectibles too.
Stephen E Arnold, January 26, 2018
Facebook and Google: Set Up a Standards Entity
January 25, 2018
Ah, governance. A murky word which means figuring out the rules of the road. Tough job.
I read “UK Advertisers urge Facebook and Google to Set Up Standards Body.” The idea is interesting. It reminds me of the hapless part time teacher who was supposed to manage my high school science club. Shortly before one of the wags ignited a smoke bomb in chemistry class, our science club was asked to stop playing pranks. Yep, that notion lasted less than 24 hours.
I think of Facebook, Google, and some other outfits as high school science and math clubs whose DNA is now more mature—just with niftier technology.
The write up ignores what I perceive as the basis of some interesting corporate behavior. I learned from the article:
Advertisers have called on Facebook and Google to establish an independent body to regulate and monitor content on both of their platforms.
Okay, both companies are supposed to generate a return for their shareholders. Both companies are not too keen on people not working in a sufficiently advanced field offering suggestions. This is similar to the concierge of a fancy hotel telling the bank president financing the outfit what to have for breakfast.
The write up opined in a “real” news way:
Google and Facebook should “thrash out some common principles” over content moderation and removal that could be adopted and enforced by an independent body, which they would fund, he [Phil Smith, director general of the Incorporated Society of British Advertiser or ISBA] said.
The write up reported:
Mr Smith, a former marketing director of Kraft, said advertisers expect the big technology companies to take action because consumers are becoming skeptical of digital advertising. “Our consumer research tells us that digital advertising is intrusive and not being trusted,” he said. Consumers “know that television advertising is regulated in some way – both the advertising and the content – but they don’t believe that to be the case in any respect when it comes to digital”.
Yep, great idea.
I believe that regulators are interested in paying more attention to Facebook and Google. I would toss Amazon and Apple into the basket as well.
However, the interest is less about sales and more about tax revenue.
How would a regulatory body go about making a modification to an automated algorithm which reacts to what users do in real time?
Facebook and Google operate in interesting ways; regulatory authorities may not be into the “interesting” thing.
Stephen E Arnold, January 25, 2018
Social Media: Gotta Love It
January 24, 2018
I noted the news story “Facebook Says It Can’t Guarantee Social Media Is Good for Democracy.” I assume that “real” journalism is good for democracy.
I highlighted this passage in the article:
Contrite Facebook executives were already fanning out across Europe this week to address the company’s slow response to abuses on its platform, such as hate speech and foreign influence campaigns.
Yes, contrition. Good.
Now about that user data and the ad revenue?
Stephen E Arnold, January 24, 2018
Facebook Experiment Harming Democracy
January 16, 2018
Facebook seems to be the last place on the Web to negatively affect democratic governments, but according to The Guardian it will in, “‘Downright Orwellian’: Journalists Decry Facebook Experiment’s Impact On Democracy.” Facebook is being compared to Big Brother in a news feed experiment that removed professional media stories from six countries. Let the article break it down for you:
The experiment, which began 19 October and is still ongoing, involves limiting the core element of Facebook’s social network to only personal posts and paid adverts.
So-called public posts, such as those from media organisation Facebook pages, are being moved to a separate “explore” feed timeline. As a result, media organisations in the six countries containing 1% of the world’s population – Sri Lanka, Guatemala, Bolivia, Cambodia, Serbia and Slovakia – have had one of their most important publishing platforms removed overnight.
In other weeks, “Eek!” These countries have very volatile governments and any threat to their news outlets is very bad if free speech is going to live. Also the news outlets in these countries do not have the budgets to pay for Facebook’s post boosting fees. Facebook was used as a free service to spread the news, but it fell more than 50% in many of the countries where this experiment was tested.
Even if Facebook were to stop the experiment some of the media outlets would not recover. It is curious why Facebook did not test the news feed experiment in another country. Oh wait, we know why. It did not want to deal with the backlash from western countries and the countless people who whine on the Internet. In the smaller countries, there is less culpability, but more home front damage. Nice job Facebook!
Whitney Grace, January 16, 2018
Big Shock: Social Media Algorithms Are Not Your Friend
December 11, 2017
One of Facebook’s founding fathers, Sean Parker, has done a surprising about-face on the online platform that earned him billions of dollars. Parker has begun speaking out against social media and the hidden machinery that keeps people interested. We learned more from a recent Axios story, “Sean Parker Unloads on Facebook ‘Exploiting’ Human Psychology.”
According to the story:
Parker’s I-was-there account provides priceless perspective in the rising debate about the power and effects of the social networks, which now have scale and reach unknown in human history. He’s worried enough that he’s sounding the alarm.
According to Parker:
The thought process that went into building these applications, Facebook being the first of them, … was all about: ‘How do we consume as much of your time and conscious attention as possible?’
And that means that we need to sort of give you a little dopamine hit every once in a while, because someone liked or commented on a photo or a post or whatever. And that’s going to get you to contribute more content, and that’s going to get you … more likes and comments.
What’s at stake here isn’t just human psychology being exploited, though. It’s a major part of the story, but, as Forbes pointed out, we are on the cusp of social engineering via social media. If more people like Parker don’t stand up and offer a solution, we fear there could be serious repercussions.
Patrick Roland, December 11, 2017
Filtering: Facebook Asserts Filtering Progress
November 29, 2017
i read “Hard Questions: Are We Winning the War on Terrorism Online?” The main point is that Facebook is filtering terrorism related content. Let’s assume that the assertion is correct. Furthermore, let’s assume that private group participants are reporting terror-related content so that information not available to the general Facebook community is devoid of terror related content.
This appears to be a step forward.
My thought is that eliminating the content may squeeze those with filtered messages to seek other avenues of information dissemination. For most people, the work arounds will be unfamiliar.
But options exist, and these options are becoming more widely used and robust. I remind myself that bad actors can be every bit as intelligent, resourceful, and persistent as the professionals working at companies like Facebook.
Within the last four months, the researchers assisting me on the second edition of the Dark Web Notebook have informed me:
- Interest in certain old-school methods of online communication has increased; for example, text communication
- Encrypted apps are gaining wider use
- Peer-to-peer mechanisms show strong uptake by certain groups
- Dark Web or i2p communication methods are not perfect but some work despite the technical hassles and latency
- Burner phones and sim cards bought with untraceable forms of payment are widely available from retail outlets like Kroger and Walgreens in the US.
Those interested in information which is filtered remind me of underground movements in the 1960s. At the university I attended, the surface looked calm. Then bang, an event would occur. Everyone was surprised and wondered where that “problem” came from. Hiding the problem does not resolve the problem I learned by observing the event.
The surface is one thing. What happens below the surface is another. Squeezing in one place on a balloon filled with water moves the water to another place. When the pressure is too great, the balloon bursts. Water goes in unexpected places.
My view is that less well known methods of communication will attract more attention. I am not sure if this is good news or bad news. I know that filtering alone does not scrub certain content from digital channels.
Net net: Challenges lie ahead. Net neutrality may provide an additional lever, but there will be those who seek to circumvent controls. Most will fail, but some will succeed. Those successes may be difficult to anticipate, monitor, and address.
Facebook filtering is comparatively easy. Reacting to consequences of filtering may be more difficult. It has taken many years to to achieve the modest victory Facebook has announced. That reaction time, in itself, is a reminder that there is something called a Pyrrhic victory.
Stephen E Arnold, November 29, 2017
Stephen E Arnold, November
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
