
Why Facebook Will Never Fix Facebook - longdefeat
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/charliewarzel/facebook-time-well-spent-dashboard-wont-fix-problems
======
bobbygoodlatte
There's something ironic about Buzzfeed advocating for content distribution
reforms on Facebook. Buzzfeed owes its entire existence to gaming Facebook's
engagement algorithm via clickbait.

What if the fix Buzzfeed is asking for involves less distribution for outlets
like Buzzfeed? I'd support that.

~~~
adt2bt
The irony isn’t lost on me, but it does not mean the article is wrong in some
way because it is published by Buzzfeed News.

If anything, I would be inclined to trust Buzzfeed’s expertise in garnering
views, clicks and ad revenue from Facebook when it comes to them criticizing
the system they thrive in.

Additionally, if those changes drive less traffic to Buzzfeed, it will likely
hurt publishers across the board and they will all have to change to survive.
Perhaps that could be in the general best interest.

~~~
bobbygoodlatte
I agree it's not wrong. While this article is light on specific proposals, I
would likely agree with the author on many reforms.

But if those reforms actually happen, I bet the executive team at Buzzfeed
won't be happy

------
jseliger
_Perhaps this shouldn’t come as a surprise. Facebook, after all, is a platform
historically powered by prioritizing and rewarding a very simplistic idea of
user engagement. You react to something, or you don’t. And if you do, you’ll
see more of the same._

This again. It's another variant on the themes I discuss in "Is there an
actual Facebook crisis, or media narrative about Facebook crisis?"
[https://jakeseliger.com/2018/11/14/is-there-an-actual-
facebo...](https://jakeseliger.com/2018/11/14/is-there-an-actual-facebook-
crisis-or-media-narrative-about-facebook-crisis/). Facebook will change when
users quit or dramatically cut back using it. Until then, actual users are
telling Facebook, "Full steam ahead."

~~~
twblalock
The users are not the only driver of change. Government regulation is very
likely to happen at this point, in both the US and the EU.

~~~
marcoperaza
Content regulation is very unlikely in the US given the Court’s near-
absolutist First Amendment jurisprudence. Regulation of advertising and
privacy is more plausible, but something like the GDPR is a constitutional and
political non-starter in America.

~~~
threeseed
GDPR comprises many facets many of which are completely constitutional.

And it maybe a political non-starter federally but all it takes is a few
states in particular New York and California to impose restrictions and you
will have the same effect.

~~~
twblalock
Especially considering Facebook is based in California, which is controlled by
the Democratic party. Many people in that party blame Facebook for helping
Trump win the 2016 election.

------
threeseed
I don't understand why Facebook is being singled out here.

Because the underlying issue is time spent on the internet as a whole. Each of
the negatives that can be attributed to Facebook apply equally to sites like
Youtube, Instagram, Snapchat, Twitter etc. And ultimately Facebook is just a
website that exposes humanities's neuroses and problems to itself.

And I still love the hypocrisy of this coming from Buzzfeed whose entire
existence centres around driving traffic through jealousy, fake news,
clickbait etc.

~~~
CharlesW
> _I don 't understand why Facebook is being singled out here._

From where I sit, they're not. Facebook is the canary in the coal mine because
of its current outsized influence, but you can find similar pieces about all
of the services you mentioned.

Here's an example, but I ran across a bunch more just looking for this one:
[https://www.wired.co.uk/article/youtube-for-kids-videos-
prob...](https://www.wired.co.uk/article/youtube-for-kids-videos-problems-
algorithm-recommend)

------
WheelsAtLarge
The real question is: What is the fix? People want social networks but they
are opposed to giving their data away or paying for the service. How does a
company survive without revenue?

The least path of resistance is giving the service free to users and selling
their data. The only fix comes from the users, not Facebook, and that's to
stop using the service. Facebook will continue to monetize the user's data as
part of their business model. There is no fix from their side.

~~~
makecheck
Do we know people wouldn’t want to pay? I know Facebook never asked me if I
would. People have a track record of paying for services like television. They
_might_ pay for social networks if given a chance. Charge me two dollars a
month, make all the creepy spying illegal, and the remnants of Facebook are
useful (staying connected to friends, etc.).

------
annadane
There's also probably a lack of dogfooding. "Oh yeah sure it's a good idea to
publically display people's likes/comments/everything..."

Not to say they haven't also been corrupt to increase engagement because they
have...

------
ken
Interestingly, the page <title> is different: "Why Mark Zuckerberg Can't Fix
Facebook".

------
jiveturkey
huh? facebook isn’t broken. it’s a monetization platform, not a force for
good. they _will_ DTRT to keep money rolling in. this talk about addictive
patterns is a sideshow.

------
ams6110
Tldr: _the incentives that govern the platform (gamifying and monetizing
attention, as well as prioritizing clicks, shares, ads, and money over quality
of information) will largely remain the same._

~~~
threeseed
Except this isn't true at all.

Facebook recently changed their algorithm to deliberately focus on the quality
of engagement.

It had a material effect on marketers and news organisations so it was pretty
significant.

