And this is what's motivating the establishment's campaign against social media. Many people think that information should go through gatekeepers - that people shouldn't be able to share information peer-to-peer without filters.
The claims of Facebook promoting hate and extremism are part of this campaign to rollback the changes brought about by Facebook. And the claims are all disingenuous nonsense.
The Facebook "whistleblower" for example explained how she was motivated to blow the whistle after one of her friends was, in her words, radicalized, through Facebook. Of course she doesn't consider herself, a lifelong "ally" and supporter of far-left causes, who worked on a search feature allowing Pinterest users to search by skin tone - in order to discriminate in favor of people of certain colors - radicalized. Because that's pro-establishment radicalism.
Agreed, they are less like a biased newspaper editor and more like a bouncer at a night-club who does not intervene when there is a fight provided the 'right' customer is winning, and then we can debate whether it's because the bouncer is racist or getting bribed.
The solution is to set FB's incentives right, which can be done by banning ads from social networks. With this solution, no other type of censoring is necessary.
The claims of Facebook promoting hate and extremism are part of this campaign to rollback the changes brought about by Facebook. And the claims are all disingenuous nonsense.
The Facebook "whistleblower" for example explained how she was motivated to blow the whistle after one of her friends was, in her words, radicalized, through Facebook. Of course she doesn't consider herself, a lifelong "ally" and supporter of far-left causes, who worked on a search feature allowing Pinterest users to search by skin tone - in order to discriminate in favor of people of certain colors - radicalized. Because that's pro-establishment radicalism.