Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It look like the video are maybe being censored by YouTube, or some other technical issue is happening.
It says for me "Video unavailable This video is not available", though the page still loads.
Tldw?Watched it tonight on PBS. Reinforced my beliefs about a lot of things not fit for discussion on this subforum, not just about Facebook.
Tldw?
This is so politically charged I'm not sure how to respond entirely non-politically so I'll be as utterly generic as I can to make the underlying point:
Please, bear in mind that PBS, and Facebook are all very, very heavily on one side of the political aisle... all working together as friends and bedfellows. Frontline sometimes presents pretty well, but rarely does anything get on PBS without adequate slant applied. This entire piece, while it is sprinkled with a lot of truth you MUST watch it with a jaded eye as to WHY they would give the appearance of eating their own. PBS and Frontline won't toss Facebook under the bus without trading it for a narrative they want to push.
You have to at least consider that a lot of this is to deny the use of the social weapon (Facebook) by the other party. While the other side is in power, preach about the dangers of Facebook and social media abuse... when they get back in power later, everything will suddenly be fine again. This is a distinct possibility.
The piece spends the first episode building with a whole lot of truth about the dangers of social media and the founding and growth of Facebook specifically. It then leaves you off at the end with the "big reveal" about Russian election interference in the US. That topic is a political nuclear mine field and centers on issues not even related to Facebook but let's stick with just the Facebook angle because of the OP. That there are Russian or Chinese or Korean or whatever trolls planting ideas and articles into Facebook and social media? Of course you'd assume it happens. Media manipulation happens every day in many forms for example when all of the dozen major news outlets somehow all have exactly the same top of the hour list and say nearly exactly the same words every morning on whatever the narrative of the day is.
The second part picks up right where the first left off and reinforces that narrative in the first minutes, then lets it rest for a bit in the middle while it piles up more other Facebook failures and dangers around the world, and then hammers the evils of Cambridge Analytica at the end. The so-called abuse of user data by a group associated with the party that ended up winning the election.
Nowhere does any of this discuss any other uses or abuses for various elections. Just the "horror" that one side's social weapon was actually used by the other side of the political aisle for once and perhaps to substantial effect. Like that was surprising? Or wrong because the other side learned how to play the social media game?
All the discussion about the actual dangers and evils and how groups can be manipulated are true. Unfortunately there were a lot of flowery words dodging around the question of HOW to regulate the posts on the platform and who decides what is and isn't ok.
When it comes to EITHER party in the US using available social media data (the same data untold numbers of businesses already use to target YOU)... where does that desire to reach the target audience go from effective political contact to manipulation? Who decides that and how? Is it based on who is in charge today? If Facebook knows how to get your message to the right people and it's the best and easiest way to do it, can you afford to not use that advantage? Knowledge is power. Communication wins battles and elections.
This is exactly WHY so many of us call social media an evil in general and why Orwellian profiles of people created and managed by companies like Facebook and Google are so terrible. These monolithic profiles of individuals shouldn't exist at all. But since they do and as long as they do they will be used to contact and influence people.
Like so many other forms of media, it's vitally important that we raise children and teach adults to not just take what comes in on a personalized feed as the only source of news. You have to take an article or anything you see on any news feed or source as a cue to read with a critical eye and note who the players are and what the suggested take-away is... THEN GO DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH and form an opinion.
I don't have any social media accounts. I don't recommend anyone have one. I went through the entire election cycle without ever logging into Facebook or any other social media site. It gives you a different perspective when you watch the whole thing from the outside of the fishbowl.
And Kyle, try to work toward getting rid of the Facebook account entirely. I've manged to run my business for over 20 years without one I'm sure you can get those clicks another way.
Deleting my Facebook account after the Cambridge Analytica scandal broke was one of the best decisions I made in 2018.
The best thing about the internet is that it gave everyone a voice. The worst thing about the internet is that it gave everyone a voice. I'll pick whose voice I want to listen to on my own - not what Facebook is paid to tell me I might find interesting.
Most people are probably in this camp, if they are being honest. A ton of people are quick to cite mitigating circumstances for their use of Facebook. Meh. Use it, don't use it. The least you can do is be candid about it.I unabashedly continue to use Facebook as I find it very useful. I have no expectations of privacy there, and use it accordingly.
Nowhere does any of this discuss any other uses or abuses for various elections. Just the "horror" that one side's social weapon was actually used by the other side of the political aisle for once and perhaps to substantial effect. Like that was surprising? Or wrong because the other side learned how to play the social media game?
Nothing like getting a ban right after getting off one for something you posted months/years earlier! I ruv it(not).(post deleted before I even posted it, I don't want to get banned again.)
I'm in this camp. I post nothing, quickly scroll through every few days to look at the highlights of the few niche groups I'm in that don't have websites or forums, and to get the 5 second update on a few family members / friends / acquaintances , and absolutely have zero expectations of privacy.I unabashedly continue to use Facebook as I find it very useful. I have no expectations of privacy there, and use it accordingly.
They seriously need to do one on Google. Google is a much bigger threat than Facebook.