"Facebook isn't free speech, it's algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage"

[triron]

Link to tweet

"The belief is apparently that any human judgement based on content beyond the absolute minimum required by law and implied by the social contract — i.e. filtering out hate speech, abuses, or dangerous medical misinformation, all of which he stresses in his speech — is dangerous and wrong, and that this goes for both native content and paid advertising. According to this belief, Facebook’s algorithm, so long as it is content-agnostic, is definitionally fair.

And that belief is just flat-out wrong. As we’ve all seen, “optimizing for engagement” all too often means optimizing for outrage, for polarization, for disingenuous misinformation. True, it doesn’t mean favoring any side of any given issue; but it does mean favoring the extremes, the conspiracy theorists, the histrionic diatribes on all sides. It means fomenting mistrust, suspicion, and conflict everywhere. We’ve all seen it. We’ve all lived it."

[Hekate]

1. Yes! I don't think the First Amendment was meant to apply to ALGORITHMS!

[PSPS]

3. The first amendment never applied to facebook (or any private media) to begin with.

[Skittles]

2. giving everyone a voice equals sucking everyone into the FB Borg

fuck Zuckerberg

[PSPS]

4. This is the same driving force in all media today. It's what I call "the outrage industry."

And some call it the "outrage porn industry."

[2naSalit]

5. +1

[Haggis for Breakfast]

6. Confirmation bias of the enraged

[maxrandb]

7. It's nothing but a corporate troll farm. N/t