
Zuckerberg’s Preposterous Defense of Facebook - elsewhen
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/29/opinion/mark-zuckerberg-facebook.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-left-region&region=opinion-c-col-left-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region
======
robertwalsh0
Zuck says that people are mad because people are sharing ideas that the other
side doesn’t like but also defends FB’s actions in the German election: “We
have been working to ensure the integrity of the German elections this
weekend, from taking actions against thousands of fake accounts, to partnering
with public authorities like the Federal Office for Information Security, to
sharing security practices with the candidates and parties.”[1]

I’m very disappointed in Zuck’s intellectual honesty.

[1][https://gizmodo.com/facebook-deleted-tens-of-thousands-of-
fa...](https://gizmodo.com/facebook-deleted-tens-of-thousands-of-fake-
accounts-dur-1818841579)

~~~
SomeStupidPoint
I'm not sure I understand what's the contradiction between those two things --
he says that people don't like certain kinds of sharing and a large
corporation with a lot of cyber security experience assists a government with
security while also monitoring its own platform for abuse during the election.

~~~
forthefuture
People are retroactively upset that they didn't do this during our election.

~~~
imron
All the while pretending it was only one side engaged in such tactics.

~~~
tessierashpool
The Russians took out ads to depress African-American voter turnout, in
Trump's favor.

The Clinton campaign did not do anything remotely similar.

~~~
tyfon
I'm not sure if this constitutes politics or what on HN, but as an outside,
not taking part in the election and living in another country, here is my
observation on this point.

Hillary f __*ed up the Bernie Sanders campaign using pretty much the same
tactics, only it was not the "Russians", they just did it themselves[0].

If anyone are to be accused for a dirty campaign it is her.

[0]
[https://www.salon.com/2016/06/20/congressional_black_caucus_...](https://www.salon.com/2016/06/20/congressional_black_caucus_comes_out_forcefully_against_bernie_sanders_proposed_transformation_of_democratic_primary_process/)

~~~
lern_too_spel
On the contrary, your article doesn't say what you claim, and Clinton led the
charge to enfranchise black voters.
[https://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/06/04/us/politics/democrats-...](https://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/06/04/us/politics/democrats-
voter-rights-lawsuit-hillary-clinton.html)

------
tapsboy
Sorry, America (and NY Times), don't make this all about you. Facebook (and
WhatsApp and Twitter and Google) have already significantly influenced the
electorate of other nations with fake news and other such tactics. Look at the
elections of more polarizing and more dangerous leaders before Trump in
Turkey, Phillipines, India, et al. Good that you woke up now, but neutrality
of the medium needs to be intact. In the long term, truth will win. More
platforms, not more regulation is the answer.

~~~
atomical
How is more platforms going to create neutrality? Wouldn't governments put
their bots on the new networks?

~~~
tapsboy
More platforms cannot ensure neutrality by itself; but can open options to
relay voices that need to be put out.

------
thesausageking

      Zuck: Yeah so if you ever need info about anyone at Harvard
      Zuck: Just ask
      Zuck: I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS
      [friend]: What? How'd you manage that one?
      Zuck: People just submitted it.
      Zuck: I don't know why.
      Zuck: They "trust me"
      Zuck: Dumb fucks

------
jacques_chester
Per Upton Sinclair:

    
    
        It is difficult to get a man to understand something, 
        when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.

------
paulddraper
> “Both sides are upset about ideas and content they don’t like,” he wrote in
> a Facebook post. “That’s what running a platform for all ideas looks like.”

> This doesn’t hold water at all.

It does, almost by definition.

> Are you bothered by fake news, systematic misinformation campaigns and
> Facebook “dark posts” — micro-targeted ads not visible to the public — aimed
> at African-Americans to discourage them from voting? You must be one of
> those people “upset about ideas” you disagree with.

Users can control which ads they see.

> Are you troubled when agents of a foreign power pose online as American
> Muslims and post incendiary content that right-wing commentators can cite as
> evidence that all American Muslims are sympathizers of terrorist groups like
> the Islamic State? Sounds like you can’t handle a healthy debate.

I can debate that.

> Does it bother you that Russian actors bought advertisements aimed at swing
> states to sow political discord during the 2016 presidential campaign, and
> that it took eight months after the election to uncover any of this? Well,
> the marketplace of ideas isn’t for everyone.

I do remember pro-Clinton anti-Trump opinions from leaders in dozens of
countries. The influence of the Russian boogeyman is vastly overstated.

> And the unfortunate truth is that by design, business model and algorithm,
> Facebook has made it easy for it to be weaponized to spread misinformation
> and fraudulent content.

The best defense against false speech is more speech. An elite centralized few
deciding what can and can't be said to we the sheeple is not the future I
want.

~~~
squozzer
What remains unclear to me is how Facebook makes misinformation and fraudulent
content so powerful, but not factual content.

I have yet to hear one person admit they did any of the following:

1) Switch their vote from HRC to DJT; 2) Decide to stay home instead of vote
for HRC; 3) Decide to vote for DJT instead of staying home.

If we're going to consider whether FB was complicit in a dirty win by DJT, we
should at least also consider some of the polls were fabricated in a attempt
to make HRC's victory look inevitable and depress R turnout.

~~~
thesagan
I admit to number 2, as a lot of us in MI did. I just stayed home because I
was so disappointed in HRC.

Fun fact, in my state the number of ballots with a blank presidential section
exceeded the margin of HRC's loss in the state. This was a Bernie state.

~~~
jessaustin
We can all regret that DNC wiped their asses with the majority of votes in the
primaries. Bernie would have beaten Trump.

------
lowry
As someone who operated an online community website twice longer than
Zuckeberg, I can confirm he is right.

