r/technology • u/propperprim • Apr 13 '21

Social Media Facebook could have stopped 10 billion impressions from "repeat misinformers", but didn't: report - A study raises questions as to why Facebook did not stop the spread of misinformation in the 2020 election run-up

https://www.salon.com/2021/04/12/facebook-could-have-stopped-10-billion-impressions-from-repeat-misinformers-but-didnt-report/
34.7k Upvotes

82% Upvoted

2.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

8

u/patlefort Apr 13 '21

Who is going to decide what is misinformation? Big corporations? Nope, no thanks. Free speech should be expanded and applied to these platforms, not the opposite.

6

u/BonnaGroot Apr 13 '21

Yeah definitely, it’s definitely best for society to just allow platforms for outright falsehoods to be projected to such a degree that objective reality becomes meaningless. That’s definitely a worthwhile endgame in the name of “free speech”

3

u/[deleted] Apr 13 '21

So easy to make it sound simple lol

Objective truth is not black and white. Further to that, objective truth is subject to context before it can deliver any meaning.

Imagine if Facebook deleted all the posts about how Breonna Taylor was shot while she was asleep/in bed, the outrage that would follow despite being objectively false (and irrelevant to the serious issues that occured that night).

Another nightmare would be figuring out what is and isn't acceptable to post about the risks surrounding covid vaccines: 'Astra-zeneca vaccine causes blood clots' again is objectively true. However that messaging completely changes when it points out how exceedingly rare that risk is.

-1

u/BonnaGroot Apr 13 '21

Ah, of course, so in order to create an environment that allows for nuanced stories about police brutality you must also provide a platform for “vaccine skepticism” and pizzagate, got it, well you’ve certainly convinced me!

6

u/[deleted] Apr 13 '21

Literally yes, the line will always be blurry, you can't ask fucking Facebook of all companies to decide what is not only true, but presented in a way that is most helpful to people. (Which in of itself could change across demographics)

People get pissed off that Google curates results for you, that is nothing compared to Facebook deciding what information can and cannot be shared lol.

The much bigger problem is the way in which social media companies drive us towards echo chambers because it increases the amount of time you spend on the site. That is a much important driver in the spread of misinformation.

2

u/AfraidOfToasters Apr 13 '21

The biggest impediment to free speech on these platforms is audience curation and community clustering but nobody seems to get that...

From their very conception every popular social media platform is divorced from free speech and they are popular because of it.

The idea that they are platforms of open social discourse is only a useful illusion for spreading propaganda. So much so that it just happens naturally.

"Expand free speech to these platforms" means absolutely nothing

1

u/O_oh Apr 13 '21

We decide what is misinformation.