The Trouble With Facebook

American_Jihad

Flaming Libs/Koranimals
May 1, 2012
11,534
3,715
350
Gulf of Mex 26.609, -82.220
Hammer Time...
The Trouble With Facebook
Zuckerberg wants to tell you what to think.
May 16, 2016
Daniel Greenfield
facebook-censorship.jpg


Despite the denials, the stories about Facebook’s bias are real. But the bias isn’t there because of the company’s new technology. Facebook is biased because of its reliance on the biased old media.

Facebook’s trending topics wasn’t the automatic system that the company wanted people to think it was. Instead it hired young journalists with new media experience to “curate” its news feed. And plenty of them proved to be biased against conservative news and sources. Meanwhile someone at the top of Facebook’s dysfunctional culture wanted to play up Syria and the Black Lives Matter hate group.

Mark Zuckerberg’s fundamental mistake was recreating the biases and agendas of the old media in a service whose whole reason for existing was to allow users to create their own experience. The big difference between social and search is that social media is supposed to let you be the curator.

But, like Facebook’s trending topics, social curation was another scam. Facebook users don’t really define what they see. It’s defined for them by the company’s agendas. This includes the purely financial. It would be foolish to think that the fortunes that Buzzfeed spends on Facebook advertising don’t impact the placement of its stories by Facebook’s mysterious algorithm. And there is the more complex intersection of politics and branding in an age when business relevance means social relevance.

Twitter piggybacked on the Arab Spring to seem relevant. Facebook has used Black Lives Matter. Social media needs to be associated with political movements to seem more important than it is. Zuckerberg doesn’t want to head up a shinier version of MySpace that was originally set up to rate the attractiveness of Harvard girls. Being socially relevant is better for business. Especially when the business is vapid at its core.

Social media needs social relevance to disguise the narcissism at the center of its appeal.

...

Meanwhile the New York Times and other media companies roll out native advertising with fake news stories that promote real products and which exist only to trick people into clicking on them. The biggest business on Facebook is high end spam overseen by major journalists and famous brand names.

All of this is alienating Facebook users. Active usage is falling sharply. Fewer users are sharing personal content. Personal update sharing fell 15 percent this year and 21 percent for the years before. But that’s what Zuckerberg wants. Facebook is becoming less of a personal site and more of a political one. Instead of millions of people trading baby announcements and family reunion photos, it’s evolving into a collective stream of ads and news stories that is indistinguishable from the mainstream media.

Facebook is not driven by user curated content or by an impersonal collection of algorithms. Like CNN or the New York Times, its agenda emerges from the political views and economic needs of its leadership. Its algorithms are not impersonal data driven metrics, but as human curated as its trending topics. The personal views of Facebook users are becoming as relevant as the comment page under a CNN story.

...

Facebook isn’t a social experience anymore. It’s a massive content machine that agrees to occasionally let you show off your baby shower pictures underneath fake viral content from its media partners. Its leadership, its employees, contractors and its media partners don’t like conservatives. And it shows.

Facebook doesn’t want to know what you think. It wants to tell you what to think. And it wants to do it while pretending that it was your idea all along.

The Trouble With Facebook
 
I use it to keep in contact with family, and some of the games.
 
Facebook is exactly what it is, an advertisement machine

It can be a product, a political ideology, or your personal life, at the end of the day, it is all advertisement...
 
Hammer Time...
The Trouble With Facebook
Zuckerberg wants to tell you what to think.
May 16, 2016
Daniel Greenfield
facebook-censorship.jpg


Despite the denials, the stories about Facebook’s bias are real. But the bias isn’t there because of the company’s new technology. Facebook is biased because of its reliance on the biased old media.

Facebook’s trending topics wasn’t the automatic system that the company wanted people to think it was. Instead it hired young journalists with new media experience to “curate” its news feed. And plenty of them proved to be biased against conservative news and sources. Meanwhile someone at the top of Facebook’s dysfunctional culture wanted to play up Syria and the Black Lives Matter hate group.

Mark Zuckerberg’s fundamental mistake was recreating the biases and agendas of the old media in a service whose whole reason for existing was to allow users to create their own experience. The big difference between social and search is that social media is supposed to let you be the curator.

But, like Facebook’s trending topics, social curation was another scam. Facebook users don’t really define what they see. It’s defined for them by the company’s agendas. This includes the purely financial. It would be foolish to think that the fortunes that Buzzfeed spends on Facebook advertising don’t impact the placement of its stories by Facebook’s mysterious algorithm. And there is the more complex intersection of politics and branding in an age when business relevance means social relevance.

Twitter piggybacked on the Arab Spring to seem relevant. Facebook has used Black Lives Matter. Social media needs to be associated with political movements to seem more important than it is. Zuckerberg doesn’t want to head up a shinier version of MySpace that was originally set up to rate the attractiveness of Harvard girls. Being socially relevant is better for business. Especially when the business is vapid at its core.

Social media needs social relevance to disguise the narcissism at the center of its appeal.

...

Meanwhile the New York Times and other media companies roll out native advertising with fake news stories that promote real products and which exist only to trick people into clicking on them. The biggest business on Facebook is high end spam overseen by major journalists and famous brand names.

All of this is alienating Facebook users. Active usage is falling sharply. Fewer users are sharing personal content. Personal update sharing fell 15 percent this year and 21 percent for the years before. But that’s what Zuckerberg wants. Facebook is becoming less of a personal site and more of a political one. Instead of millions of people trading baby announcements and family reunion photos, it’s evolving into a collective stream of ads and news stories that is indistinguishable from the mainstream media.

Facebook is not driven by user curated content or by an impersonal collection of algorithms. Like CNN or the New York Times, its agenda emerges from the political views and economic needs of its leadership. Its algorithms are not impersonal data driven metrics, but as human curated as its trending topics. The personal views of Facebook users are becoming as relevant as the comment page under a CNN story.

...

Facebook isn’t a social experience anymore. It’s a massive content machine that agrees to occasionally let you show off your baby shower pictures underneath fake viral content from its media partners. Its leadership, its employees, contractors and its media partners don’t like conservatives. And it shows.

Facebook doesn’t want to know what you think. It wants to tell you what to think. And it wants to do it while pretending that it was your idea all along.

The Trouble With Facebook

Wow -- Jizzhat appears under the light of day. Must be sunspots. :rofl:

Good topic though. You oughta come out in the daylight more often.
 
I use it to keep in contact with family, and some of the games.

That's what e-mail, telephone and the internet already do.

Addicted friends tried to get me to sign up for Nosebook. I kept asking them, "what will this give me that I don't already have?" Never got an answer.
 
oh, come on, now.

My 1234 facebook friends - 1202 I wouldn't recognize if we passed each other on the street - all disagree!

They think facebook is the bomb!
 
Hammer Time...
The Trouble With Facebook
Zuckerberg wants to tell you what to think.
May 16, 2016
Daniel Greenfield
facebook-censorship.jpg


Despite the denials, the stories about Facebook’s bias are real. But the bias isn’t there because of the company’s new technology. Facebook is biased because of its reliance on the biased old media.

Facebook’s trending topics wasn’t the automatic system that the company wanted people to think it was. Instead it hired young journalists with new media experience to “curate” its news feed. And plenty of them proved to be biased against conservative news and sources. Meanwhile someone at the top of Facebook’s dysfunctional culture wanted to play up Syria and the Black Lives Matter hate group.

Mark Zuckerberg’s fundamental mistake was recreating the biases and agendas of the old media in a service whose whole reason for existing was to allow users to create their own experience. The big difference between social and search is that social media is supposed to let you be the curator.

But, like Facebook’s trending topics, social curation was another scam. Facebook users don’t really define what they see. It’s defined for them by the company’s agendas. This includes the purely financial. It would be foolish to think that the fortunes that Buzzfeed spends on Facebook advertising don’t impact the placement of its stories by Facebook’s mysterious algorithm. And there is the more complex intersection of politics and branding in an age when business relevance means social relevance.

Twitter piggybacked on the Arab Spring to seem relevant. Facebook has used Black Lives Matter. Social media needs to be associated with political movements to seem more important than it is. Zuckerberg doesn’t want to head up a shinier version of MySpace that was originally set up to rate the attractiveness of Harvard girls. Being socially relevant is better for business. Especially when the business is vapid at its core.

Social media needs social relevance to disguise the narcissism at the center of its appeal.

...

Meanwhile the New York Times and other media companies roll out native advertising with fake news stories that promote real products and which exist only to trick people into clicking on them. The biggest business on Facebook is high end spam overseen by major journalists and famous brand names.

All of this is alienating Facebook users. Active usage is falling sharply. Fewer users are sharing personal content. Personal update sharing fell 15 percent this year and 21 percent for the years before. But that’s what Zuckerberg wants. Facebook is becoming less of a personal site and more of a political one. Instead of millions of people trading baby announcements and family reunion photos, it’s evolving into a collective stream of ads and news stories that is indistinguishable from the mainstream media.

Facebook is not driven by user curated content or by an impersonal collection of algorithms. Like CNN or the New York Times, its agenda emerges from the political views and economic needs of its leadership. Its algorithms are not impersonal data driven metrics, but as human curated as its trending topics. The personal views of Facebook users are becoming as relevant as the comment page under a CNN story.

...

Facebook isn’t a social experience anymore. It’s a massive content machine that agrees to occasionally let you show off your baby shower pictures underneath fake viral content from its media partners. Its leadership, its employees, contractors and its media partners don’t like conservatives. And it shows.

Facebook doesn’t want to know what you think. It wants to tell you what to think. And it wants to do it while pretending that it was your idea all along.

The Trouble With Facebook

Wow -- Jizzhat appears under the light of day. Must be sunspots. :rofl:

Good topic though. You oughta come out in the daylight more often.
Well jizzsucker, I had nothing scheduled today so bashing libtarts/islamics/obongos seemed in order...
:whip:
 
Hammer Time...
The Trouble With Facebook
Zuckerberg wants to tell you what to think.
May 16, 2016
Daniel Greenfield
facebook-censorship.jpg


Despite the denials, the stories about Facebook’s bias are real. But the bias isn’t there because of the company’s new technology. Facebook is biased because of its reliance on the biased old media.

Facebook’s trending topics wasn’t the automatic system that the company wanted people to think it was. Instead it hired young journalists with new media experience to “curate” its news feed. And plenty of them proved to be biased against conservative news and sources. Meanwhile someone at the top of Facebook’s dysfunctional culture wanted to play up Syria and the Black Lives Matter hate group.

Mark Zuckerberg’s fundamental mistake was recreating the biases and agendas of the old media in a service whose whole reason for existing was to allow users to create their own experience. The big difference between social and search is that social media is supposed to let you be the curator.

But, like Facebook’s trending topics, social curation was another scam. Facebook users don’t really define what they see. It’s defined for them by the company’s agendas. This includes the purely financial. It would be foolish to think that the fortunes that Buzzfeed spends on Facebook advertising don’t impact the placement of its stories by Facebook’s mysterious algorithm. And there is the more complex intersection of politics and branding in an age when business relevance means social relevance.

Twitter piggybacked on the Arab Spring to seem relevant. Facebook has used Black Lives Matter. Social media needs to be associated with political movements to seem more important than it is. Zuckerberg doesn’t want to head up a shinier version of MySpace that was originally set up to rate the attractiveness of Harvard girls. Being socially relevant is better for business. Especially when the business is vapid at its core.

Social media needs social relevance to disguise the narcissism at the center of its appeal.

...

Meanwhile the New York Times and other media companies roll out native advertising with fake news stories that promote real products and which exist only to trick people into clicking on them. The biggest business on Facebook is high end spam overseen by major journalists and famous brand names.

All of this is alienating Facebook users. Active usage is falling sharply. Fewer users are sharing personal content. Personal update sharing fell 15 percent this year and 21 percent for the years before. But that’s what Zuckerberg wants. Facebook is becoming less of a personal site and more of a political one. Instead of millions of people trading baby announcements and family reunion photos, it’s evolving into a collective stream of ads and news stories that is indistinguishable from the mainstream media.

Facebook is not driven by user curated content or by an impersonal collection of algorithms. Like CNN or the New York Times, its agenda emerges from the political views and economic needs of its leadership. Its algorithms are not impersonal data driven metrics, but as human curated as its trending topics. The personal views of Facebook users are becoming as relevant as the comment page under a CNN story.

...

Facebook isn’t a social experience anymore. It’s a massive content machine that agrees to occasionally let you show off your baby shower pictures underneath fake viral content from its media partners. Its leadership, its employees, contractors and its media partners don’t like conservatives. And it shows.

Facebook doesn’t want to know what you think. It wants to tell you what to think. And it wants to do it while pretending that it was your idea all along.

The Trouble With Facebook

Wow -- Jizzhat appears under the light of day. Must be sunspots. :rofl:

Good topic though. You oughta come out in the daylight more often.
Well jizzsucker, I had nothing scheduled today so bashing libtarts/islamics/obongos seemed in order...
:whip:


Your title and OP are about facebook though.

Stopped clock syndrome is it?
 
Hammer Time...
The Trouble With Facebook
Zuckerberg wants to tell you what to think.
May 16, 2016
Daniel Greenfield
facebook-censorship.jpg


Despite the denials, the stories about Facebook’s bias are real. But the bias isn’t there because of the company’s new technology. Facebook is biased because of its reliance on the biased old media.

Facebook’s trending topics wasn’t the automatic system that the company wanted people to think it was. Instead it hired young journalists with new media experience to “curate” its news feed. And plenty of them proved to be biased against conservative news and sources. Meanwhile someone at the top of Facebook’s dysfunctional culture wanted to play up Syria and the Black Lives Matter hate group.

Mark Zuckerberg’s fundamental mistake was recreating the biases and agendas of the old media in a service whose whole reason for existing was to allow users to create their own experience. The big difference between social and search is that social media is supposed to let you be the curator.

But, like Facebook’s trending topics, social curation was another scam. Facebook users don’t really define what they see. It’s defined for them by the company’s agendas. This includes the purely financial. It would be foolish to think that the fortunes that Buzzfeed spends on Facebook advertising don’t impact the placement of its stories by Facebook’s mysterious algorithm. And there is the more complex intersection of politics and branding in an age when business relevance means social relevance.

Twitter piggybacked on the Arab Spring to seem relevant. Facebook has used Black Lives Matter. Social media needs to be associated with political movements to seem more important than it is. Zuckerberg doesn’t want to head up a shinier version of MySpace that was originally set up to rate the attractiveness of Harvard girls. Being socially relevant is better for business. Especially when the business is vapid at its core.

Social media needs social relevance to disguise the narcissism at the center of its appeal.

...

Meanwhile the New York Times and other media companies roll out native advertising with fake news stories that promote real products and which exist only to trick people into clicking on them. The biggest business on Facebook is high end spam overseen by major journalists and famous brand names.

All of this is alienating Facebook users. Active usage is falling sharply. Fewer users are sharing personal content. Personal update sharing fell 15 percent this year and 21 percent for the years before. But that’s what Zuckerberg wants. Facebook is becoming less of a personal site and more of a political one. Instead of millions of people trading baby announcements and family reunion photos, it’s evolving into a collective stream of ads and news stories that is indistinguishable from the mainstream media.

Facebook is not driven by user curated content or by an impersonal collection of algorithms. Like CNN or the New York Times, its agenda emerges from the political views and economic needs of its leadership. Its algorithms are not impersonal data driven metrics, but as human curated as its trending topics. The personal views of Facebook users are becoming as relevant as the comment page under a CNN story.

...

Facebook isn’t a social experience anymore. It’s a massive content machine that agrees to occasionally let you show off your baby shower pictures underneath fake viral content from its media partners. Its leadership, its employees, contractors and its media partners don’t like conservatives. And it shows.

Facebook doesn’t want to know what you think. It wants to tell you what to think. And it wants to do it while pretending that it was your idea all along.

The Trouble With Facebook

Wow -- Jizzhat appears under the light of day. Must be sunspots. :rofl:

Good topic though. You oughta come out in the daylight more often.
Well jizzsucker, I had nothing scheduled today so bashing libtarts/islamics/obongos seemed in order...
:whip:


Your title and OP are about facebook though.

Stopped clock syndrome is it?
:rolleyes: Jizzsucker, facebook = progressive/left-wing/liberal...
 
I use it to keep in contact with family, and some of the games.

That's what e-mail, telephone and the internet already do.

Addicted friends tried to get me to sign up for Nosebook. I kept asking them, "what will this give me that I don't already have?" Never got an answer.


Heartily dislike playing phone tag, dislike conversing by email, internet?

Facebook is a part of the internet, and I use it.

Got a great video of great nephew breaking school records in discuss and shot put the other day, and was able to see the comments of family and friends on his accomplishment.
 
I use it to keep in contact with family, and some of the games.

That's what e-mail, telephone and the internet already do.

Addicted friends tried to get me to sign up for Nosebook. I kept asking them, "what will this give me that I don't already have?" Never got an answer.


Heartily dislike playing phone tag, dislike conversing by email, internet?

Facebook is a part of the internet, and I use it.

Got a great video of great nephew breaking school records in discuss and shot put the other day, and was able to see the comments of family and friends on his accomplishment.

But again --- I can do the latter on my laptop, which, again, is something I already have. And no, I actually like conversing by email. It's essential, since the phone is unreliable.
 
Hammer Time...
The Trouble With Facebook
Zuckerberg wants to tell you what to think.
May 16, 2016
Daniel Greenfield
facebook-censorship.jpg


Despite the denials, the stories about Facebook’s bias are real. But the bias isn’t there because of the company’s new technology. Facebook is biased because of its reliance on the biased old media.

Facebook’s trending topics wasn’t the automatic system that the company wanted people to think it was. Instead it hired young journalists with new media experience to “curate” its news feed. And plenty of them proved to be biased against conservative news and sources. Meanwhile someone at the top of Facebook’s dysfunctional culture wanted to play up Syria and the Black Lives Matter hate group.

Mark Zuckerberg’s fundamental mistake was recreating the biases and agendas of the old media in a service whose whole reason for existing was to allow users to create their own experience. The big difference between social and search is that social media is supposed to let you be the curator.

But, like Facebook’s trending topics, social curation was another scam. Facebook users don’t really define what they see. It’s defined for them by the company’s agendas. This includes the purely financial. It would be foolish to think that the fortunes that Buzzfeed spends on Facebook advertising don’t impact the placement of its stories by Facebook’s mysterious algorithm. And there is the more complex intersection of politics and branding in an age when business relevance means social relevance.

Twitter piggybacked on the Arab Spring to seem relevant. Facebook has used Black Lives Matter. Social media needs to be associated with political movements to seem more important than it is. Zuckerberg doesn’t want to head up a shinier version of MySpace that was originally set up to rate the attractiveness of Harvard girls. Being socially relevant is better for business. Especially when the business is vapid at its core.

Social media needs social relevance to disguise the narcissism at the center of its appeal.

...

Meanwhile the New York Times and other media companies roll out native advertising with fake news stories that promote real products and which exist only to trick people into clicking on them. The biggest business on Facebook is high end spam overseen by major journalists and famous brand names.

All of this is alienating Facebook users. Active usage is falling sharply. Fewer users are sharing personal content. Personal update sharing fell 15 percent this year and 21 percent for the years before. But that’s what Zuckerberg wants. Facebook is becoming less of a personal site and more of a political one. Instead of millions of people trading baby announcements and family reunion photos, it’s evolving into a collective stream of ads and news stories that is indistinguishable from the mainstream media.

Facebook is not driven by user curated content or by an impersonal collection of algorithms. Like CNN or the New York Times, its agenda emerges from the political views and economic needs of its leadership. Its algorithms are not impersonal data driven metrics, but as human curated as its trending topics. The personal views of Facebook users are becoming as relevant as the comment page under a CNN story.

...

Facebook isn’t a social experience anymore. It’s a massive content machine that agrees to occasionally let you show off your baby shower pictures underneath fake viral content from its media partners. Its leadership, its employees, contractors and its media partners don’t like conservatives. And it shows.

Facebook doesn’t want to know what you think. It wants to tell you what to think. And it wants to do it while pretending that it was your idea all along.

The Trouble With Facebook

Wow -- Jizzhat appears under the light of day. Must be sunspots. :rofl:

Good topic though. You oughta come out in the daylight more often.
Well jizzsucker, I had nothing scheduled today so bashing libtarts/islamics/obongos seemed in order...
:whip:


Your title and OP are about facebook though.

Stopped clock syndrome is it?
:rolleyes: Jizzsucker, facebook = progressive/left-wing/liberal...

rofl.gif


I knew you wouldn't let me down.
 
I use it to keep in contact with family, and some of the games.

That's what e-mail, telephone and the internet already do.

Addicted friends tried to get me to sign up for Nosebook. I kept asking them, "what will this give me that I don't already have?" Never got an answer.


Heartily dislike playing phone tag, dislike conversing by email, internet?

Facebook is a part of the internet, and I use it.

Got a great video of great nephew breaking school records in discuss and shot put the other day, and was able to see the comments of family and friends on his accomplishment.

But again --- I can do the latter on my laptop, which, again, is something I already have. And no, I actually like conversing by email. It's essential, since the phone is unreliable.


Good for you.

I have Facebook on my desktop, my ipad, and my ipod.

I prefer it to other programs
 
Users are just the product for Facebook. Anyone who thinks he's a customer is fooling himself.
 
Facebook to Integrate Left-Wing Attacks on Conservative Stories You Share
December 15, 2016
Daniel Greenfield
facebook-big-brother_1.jpg


Facebook resisted the Fake News crusade for a little while. But as I predicted, they bowed. Partisan left-wing "fact checking" sites will now be able to get an opportunity to smear and argue with conservative news stories that you share. It goes without saying that the right doesn't run the other way. Conservative sites won't be allowed to rebut smears and myths from the left.

If you share a link to a conservative story that the left doesn't like, its editorialists who call themselves "fact checkers" may be able to integrate their rebuttal directly into the feed.

According to BuzzFeed, which aggressively pushed the Fake News crusade, this is what that will look like.

sub-buzz-12484-1481824272-1.png


In essence, Facebook is giving the partisan left free space on conservative news links. It's also allowing them to undermine a conservative link while promoting their own agenda.

It's not quite censorship, but the partnership with left-wing partisan "checkers" helps move it to the next step of barring sites outright. For the moment, Facebook has decided that you shouldn't just be able to share links to what you're interested in without the left getting a say.

...

Facebook to Integrate Left-Wing Attacks on Conservative Stories You Share
 
FACEBOOK THREATENS TO BAN CONSERVATIVE SITES IF THEY DISAGREE WITH THE LEFT
August 28, 2017

Daniel Greenfield
facebook-big-brother_1.jpg


This was the inevitable next step once Facebook (along with Google) began rolling "Fact Checks" into their system. Fact checking sites are partisan left-wing outlets whose claims have often been disproven. Some, like Snopes, are utterly unprofessional and have no credibility whatsoever. But now we move on to the next step in Facebook's censorship.

...

The next step will be to ban them from Facebook.

Once Google begins taking similar measures, conservative sites will simply disappear from the internet. They won't appear on social media or the search index monopoly that controls 80 percent of search traffic.

This is a serious threat to freedom of speech. It's why the next battle will be to break up the dot com monopolies. And the battle is coming.

Facebook Threatens to Ban Conservative Sites If They Disagree With the Left
 

Forum List

Back
Top