Slashdot Mirror
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg Rejects Trump Bias Claims (bbc.com)
Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg has dismissed comments made by Donald Trump that the site has always been against him. From a report: The US president accused the social network of "collusion" on Twitter, branding it "anti-Trump". He made the same claim against the New York Times and the Washington Post. Facebook will shortly hand over 3,000 political adverts to congressional investigators probing alleged Russian meddling in the US election. The site believes the ads were probably purchased by Russian entities during and after the 2016 presidential contest. Facebook, Twitter and Google have been asked to testify before the US Senate Intelligence Committee on 1 November about the allegations of Russian interference. Mark Zuckerberg has made it clear in the past that he doesn't like Donald Trump -- or at least, his policies. "This statement shows frustration, I think. Not just with the president, but at the atmosphere swirling around Facebook at the moment -- commentary that is painting it as a burden on the electoral process, and maybe even on society as a whole. He's trying to show all the good -- as he sees it -- that Facebook has done.
...crickets...
Faceobook is kind of like the collective hive mind of America. And let's face it, more Americans dislike the head Cheeto than like him. So yeah, FB is probably biased against him ... as is everything else where more than four people get together at once. Because he's an asshole.
This sentence of your story sure indicates BIAS... "Mark Zuckerberg has made it clear in the past that he doesn't like Donald Trump -- or at least, his policies."
"We have investigated ourselves and found that we did nothing wrong." - Facebook/Police
"Except for that politically biased 'trending news' selection that made the news during last year's election, but we stopped that, honest." - Zuckerberg
If the concern is foreign actors meddling with the U.S. election, shouldn't Facebook be turning over to Congress all political ads purchased on Facebook by foreigners for viewing in the U.S.?
By turning over only the Russian ads, they've basically already confirmed Trump's accusation of bias. If you only look for roaches in the kitchen, you'll only find roaches in the kitchen. Doesn't mean there aren't roaches in the rest of your house. And for all you know the kitchen may actually have the fewest roaches.
what the hell does "The site believes the ads were [probably] purchased by Russian entities .." mean? Either there is clear evidence that <madeupname> Nikoli Polityetski </madeupname> purchased an add that linked back to an account with the Bank of Moscow, or there isn't. To say that any anti-clinton add _probably_ was purchased by Russian entities, and no body else, is nothing but hearsay and speculation. I hope its not a 'probably' but instead a clearer link than that. Otherwise this is nothing but Jury tampering before a trial (figurative or literal, whatever the case may be)
3000 ads doesn't really seem like a large number to me. I'm pretty sure the 3 or 4 days right before any election, I see nearly that many ads of all the local political races like judges, magistrates, city council, etc. And why is it that most of these articles make it look like all the Russian tampering was pro-trump, when just a day ago there was another article that suggested that these 'Russian entities' were buying a lot of pro Black Lives Matter, as well as anti-immigration ads, in equal amounts. That article suggested these 'Russian entities' where deliberately trying to divide the populace and create racial tensions.
Here is a link to one of the papers re-capping the information. http://nypost.com/2017/09/27/r... Ironically the NYPost cites sources at CNN, which I went back and watched the video with Wolf Blitzer, and yet CNN keeps beating the "Russians cheated to get Trump elected" drum.
I spend a fair amount of time on Facebook. The trending stories were all (and still are) overwhelmingly negative towards Trump. As a matter of fact, I don't think I've ever seen anything positive about Trump on Facebook. And I've not once seen a pro-Trump ad.
Well, pondering the mainstream media's handling of the American election, I could only conclude there was an incredible bias against the Republican candidate. Good journalism shouldn't be so. In a modern, rights protecting democracies and republics, the news media really should be as level and unbiased as can be, yet I couldn't get over the impression certain major - supposedly first class - outlets were playing the unofficial mouth organs for the Democratic Party. For that reason alone, it is a good thing Trump won, regardless of what one thinks of him, his policies or his Twittering.
I'm a political centrist... The left are psychopathic children trying to destroy America... The right are honorable people trying to do what's best for their beloved country... I see this all from my unbiased mountaintop...
Centrist? I don't think that word means what you think it means.
When I look at the political right, I see them acting maturely, honorably, and in the best interest of the nation.
Yes. With our mature, level-headed leader in the White House tackling all of the most important issues, what could possibly go wrong? Not meaning to Troll, just wondering WTF you're smoking. I want some.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
except that it is.. http://nypost.com/2017/09/27/r... Even admitted to by CNN itself, which you can watch live here http://money.cnn.com/2017/09/2...
According to the link you posted, it said that the Russians trolls purchased ads purportedly plugging Black Lives Matter "to stir up fear and cause political chaos in Baltimore and Ferguson, Missouri, during the 2016 presidential election." That was the very first sentence in the link you posted. These ads were not "Democrats colluding with Russia," they were Russians attempting to foment discontent and disruption.
Further down in the link you posted: "The ad, which was first posted in late 2015 or early 2016, appeared to support the social justice movement — but sources said it could also be seen as depicting it in a negative light. “This is consistent with the overall goal of creating discord inside the body politic here in the United States, and really across the West,” explained Steve Hall, former CIA officer and CNN National Security Analyst.... In addition to the BLM posts, sources told CNN that the Russians were pushing ads that promoted gun rights and the Second Amendment — as well as warnings about undocumented immigrants."
In other words, they looked for the issues causing division in America, and hammered on them.
The ads helped him get elected. He wouldn't have become president without those ads.
See, that there is the hand waving part. Evidence needed.
Yes that Trending sticky header on the top right of Facebook pages appears to be dedicated to publicizing each and every news item that was or is expected:
Anyhow, can anyone tell us exactly which fake news caused them to not vote for Hillary and instead vote for Trump? Was her private email SERVER fake news? Was her involvement in the ousting of the Egyptian and Libyan heads-of-state in 2011 fake news? Was it fake news that she read, from a prepared speech, that millions of Americans belonged in a basket of deplorables? Anyone ever wonder what a basket of deplorables (i.e., a place where you would put those persons you deem irredeemable) would look like?
In all seriousness:
Back in the day it was a free-for-all of lying, but in more recent history in democratic nations it's been the culture to avoid getting caught in a lie - so you get politicians who very carefully phrase what they say so they always have plausible deniability - they can say, "No, I didn't say that". And it's been newsworthy when they're presented with proof they did, and sometimes serious affected their careers.
Trump - starting with the inauguration crowd size (though you could also argue back to the birther stuff, I suppose) and not stopping since - doesn't seem to care at all, and will tell a lie with the proof it's a lie being held up in front of him, and then slander the person presenting the proof. It's a different order magnitude of political sleaze.
Let's face it, the real goal of those advertisements was to create division. Now, I'm not saying that without all those Russian advertisements, the election wouldn't still have been divisive. Both Trump and Clinton are polarizing people. But the advertisements stoked the flames, as it were.
Because Russia wants a weak West. Honestly, Putin probably would have preferred Clinton in office. (No, hold on, let me finish.) Because if that had been the only election day difference, the GOP would still have control of both the House and the Senate. Clinton would be unable to get anything done, and come on, the calls for her impeachment would have started the day after the election.
The U.S. would be even further up shit creek than it is right now.
Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
"No, you're an anonymous coward."
- No, the name is 'Anonymous Coward'. The political affiliation is theirs to choose and define.
"What, the right side????"
- Unexpectedly insightful from you, until you define the 'right side' as Republicans. It should be obvious by now that the Republican leadership (I call them the GOPe) no longer acts as a right-wing movement.
"You mean like NAFTA, the agreement negotiated by President George H. W. Bush?"
Even GH made mistakes. Though I believe NAFTA hasn't been so bad, since it was negated by the rise of Chinese trade. Woops, that didn't work out at all like it was expected to.
"Which threats? Like, say, the 911 attacks, during the presidency of George W. Bush, that occurred because he ignored the repeated warnings that Al Qaeda was dangerous?"
Well, yes. Given that the border security is obviously (by their own words and actions) proven to be anathema to the Left, and the obvious effects, our current President, being a non-Leftist, is acting consistently with a non-Leftist philosophy and pursuing improved border security.
"That would be nice. Except I see no evidence that anybody on the right has the slightest notion of how to fix it"
- Neither political party has any real interest in 'fixing healthcare'. The Leftist leadership intended for the system to fail, justifying nationalizing healthcare - read those old reports from those who drafted the legislation - it was intentionally designed to fail. The GOPe won't do anything, they are acting solely in self-interest, desperate to cling to their jobs and power.
"In what way? I haven't seen any evidence of people on the right trying to improve the country."
- Care to offer your definition of 'improve the country'?
"When you say "I'm a centrist," and then follow it up with "the right is good, good, nothing but good, and the left is bad, bad, nothing but bad", the second part pretty much shows the first part is a lie."
- I agree with your observation that the poster has a 'the right is good...' and 'the left is bad...' view. Remarkably, though I consider myself a Conservative, and therefore without a political party to represent me or to present candidates to vote for. This does NOT define me as a centrist, but rather a right-winger, no longer represented by represented by the traditional right-wing political party leadership. It is difficult to define a centrist today because I believe most are in the position of rejecting the Left, but feeling betrayed by the GOPe. Many are on the different axis, Libertarian or Anarchist, the most intellectual taking a 'Voluntaryist' stand. as a self-professed Conservative, I see the Left as a genuine threat to this nation's existence as intended by its founders and the first 200 or so years of its existence. Such changes they intend to make by fiat, usurping power in all branches of government and 'legislating' away the protections and freedoms intended by our founders. This should be obvious to an observer.
But to challenge a self-professed centrist and claim they are unwittingly right-wing devolves the argument into an us v them battle, and sadly one of those, you choose which represents 'us' and which 'them', no longer opposes the 'other' in our federal government. This leaves many voters without a representative political party. And so Trump is elected as a Republican, though he is clearly not, and need not be. He usurped the GOPe (an insult they will never, ever forgive) and win the election as the genuine 'Opposition' candidate, first to the GOP Establishment (the GOPe I keep denigrating), and then in opposition to the Leftist candidate. He won based on his third alternative - neither Left nor artificial Right. Cruz was the only republican alternative to a GOPe-approve candidate, and Cruz was destroyed by his own party. Sanders' campaign suffered a similar fate for similar reasons.
As a Conservative, I am in league with Centrists. Libertarians, Anarchists, and most who reject the major political parties
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
I don't agree. There is plenty of evidence that FB will delete any far right nutjob in a millisecond but take weeks or months to get around to taking down Islamic State recruiting videos, or Antifa crap. If you're going to have a no-hate-speech rule, it needs to be enforced 100% the same regardless of who posts the content. Even Nancy Pelosy, someone who I don't have a lot of respect for, has admitted that Antifa is a hate group and themselves behaving in a fascist manner. Its no different than defending an abortion bomber but condemning an IRA church bomber. This whole, overlook the means as long as the end goal suits my needs, is the essence of Bias.
It's well known that Trump won the election in no small part due to inexpensive, highly targeted Facebook ads.
No, it's commonly ASSERTED by bitter lefty losers who didn't get their queen as promised. She, of course, and her supporters, spent orders of magnitude more money on Facebook ads screeching to the hilltops about the evil and incompetence of her xenophobic, racist opponent. If spending on FB ads impacted the election, all it did was make her lose by less than she otherwise would have.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
you do realize the media was trying to rig the election from the beginning right? There was no objective journalism. The hacked DNC email proved they colluded with the DNC to put Hillary into the front seat. They did the same for the Republicans after their first attempt at cherry-picking Jeb Bush fell flat on its face. The RNC voters were already sick of dynasties. When Jeb fizzled out they started helping Trump. It wasnt until AFTER he got the RNC nomination that they went on the attack. It was about manipulating the election in order to give the perceived choice that of Hillary (their cherry pick for president) and some no experience guy they thought didnt stand a chance even against someone as unlikeable as Hillary. Had this entire election been free of tampering and meddling, from both Russians AND the media, you would have had a COMPLETELY different result in both RNC and DNC nominated candidates. Stop letting the MSM off the hook. Honestly what the MSM did disgusts me more than the Russian tampering. At least in the case of Russia, its not our own people trying to fuck us over.
Do you think that, broadly speaking, "left wing" groups are quicker to complain and seek sanctions on their opponents than "right wing" groups?
I'm kind of inclined to believe this, and it might account for some of apparent bias the "average" user not closely linked with "left wing" or "right wing" groups might see on Facebook.
Not everyone who voted Trump is deplorable, but to be fair, everyone who was happy to be voting for Trump is.
Interesting how those who espouse to be all caring and not judgemental are the most judgemental of all.
Beware of Sales Reps bearing gifts.
What is 'in the middle' these days?
Liberalism is the belief that personal behavior should be left up to personal preference, and that business interests should be regulated for the public good. Conservatism is the belief that personal behavior should be regulated for the public good, and that business interests should be left alone because this is the fashion in which they allegedly operate in the public good.
Regardless of how you feel about these positions, it's possible to make relatively objective judgements about how other people feel about them. Both Democrats and Republicans are for the most part solidly in the pockets of big business, to the extent that it is not just "not uncommon" but typical for corporate lawyers to initially draft legislation which is then handed off to congresscritters to be converted into actual laws. So we know that both of them are at best soft on regulation of business. That means that at best, Democrats are centrists. They do typically seem to support personal freedom, with some notable exceptions involving censorship. Republicans are clearly far more towards the "right" (ugh) side of the spectrum, hence the name. Trump is demonstrating now what the republican fantasy looks like when it comes to controls on business. He's doing everything he can to take off the leash, most infamously in the area of environmental protection. Environmental protection laws have made massive, readily noticeable improvements in public health.
TL;DR: "Democrats"
(We could also talk about the anarchist/fascist axis of authoritarianism, but why not save that for another comment?)
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Yes, I remember pizzagate. I also remember post-election riots, a recount in several states that appears to have fizzled-out, accusations of Trump colluding with Russia, Republican congresspersons being shot by an leftist inspired by anti-Trump news stories (from "legitimate" network and cable news sources), etc.
You also seem to have forgotten the multi-sourced reports before the election that Trump, at most, had a one-in-four chance of winning. That may or may not have discouraged potential voters from voting for Trump but it certainly discouraged potential Trump campaign contributors: 2016 election/campaign finance.
In all seriousness:
OK, for the sake of argument, Facebook is left-leaning. Probably wrong but we are going to humour you for argument's sake.
This is entirely negated by Trump's behavior. Seriously, Trump thinks that anyone who does not provide absolute, slavish fealty to the Big Giant Orange Head, is "biased and so unfair."
Anyone reporting the facts on the Trump Presidency is therefore "colluding and anti-Trump."
You know who Trump thinks is "fair" to Trump? Fox & Friends. Sean Hannity. Kelly Ann Conway. Sean Spicer. Anyone willing to baldly lie and state that Up is Down to protect the ego of the Big Giant Orange Head! Anyone desperate to climb the social/political/organizational ladders and lacking in personal integrity. Anyone else? Cricket noises...
Came in for the Trump Derangement Syndrome posts. Found it in the first dozen.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
Trump has failed at lots of things, but he also has got lots of other things done â" all of them bad for us,
Actually you are very much wrong on just about everything you said here. Trump hasn't really failed at anything but his timing on a lot of things. He has gotten a lot of good things done, and nothing really bad for us in any way. What I mean by US, I mean the USA. I honestly don't know where you are posting from. Might be Iran or NK for all I know. So, things Trump is doing might just be bad for you.
Once you pull the TDS blinders off and examine what Trump is doing for the USA, you will actually see is doing a pretty good job. He got a rocky start, made a lot of amateur mistakes, but now 8 months in he seems to be getting the hang of the job. He is still make a few amateur mistakes but seems to be correcting them.
Healthcare reform is happening, and it is happening at a pace that is should be. Illegal immigration has slowed, which is good. He handled the DACA issues perfectly by kicking it back into the hands of Congress where it belongs. He has scaled back his talk of a "big beautiful wall" since being elected. I imagine soon that will be quietly put down too. Employment numbers are going up, the economy is humming along just fine. And his handling of not 1 but 3 major natural disasters is nothing short of outstanding.
So you see, despite the gloom and doom SJW predicted of Trump none of it has really come to pass. We are doing just fine.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
An you are also quite wrong on everything you said.
The pissing match between NK and the US has been going on for 60+ years. Trump is handling it just fine. It is not Trump that is lobbing missiles over Japan and treating to set off nuclear weapons in the Pacific just because he can.
Yes, health care reform is moving along fine. Your very own post proves my point. The ones that have been tried are pretty bad so they have not passed. Which is why they are moving along just fine. Nice and slow, just as it should be for something as important.
Trump has condemned white supremacists and nazi's over and over. Just a few days ago he signed a bill from Congress condemning it. Turmp's position on the issue, along with the Supreme Court, Congress, and every other rational person in America is disgusting as they are, white supremacists and nazi's have just the same rights as everyone else. The right to assemble and the right to free speech.
That silly law has been waved already, but you probably didn't know about that just like you didn't know about the above mentioned bill did you? So yes, Trump is doing just fine here, too.
As for the economy snowflakes where panicking that the economy would tank soon after Trump took office, which it hasn't. In fact when he did take office the number went up instead of down. New jobs are being added and the economy is growing. So again even with Trump at the helm we are doing just fine.
As for his appointments, again he is appointing but Democrats in congress are blocking. He could do better but it is what is is. Even then we are still doing just fine.
So you see, even your doom and gloom is basically all hogwash. We are doing just fine.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
Are you really that stupid that you think Seoul matters anymore? Of course you are. Your Trump Derangement Syndrome won't let you see it any other way. Let me explain this to you and I'll try not to use any big words so you will understand it.
For the past 20 year American presidents have been playing with kid gloves with North Korea, all because of Seoul. Sanctions, treaties, and bribes to get the North Korean leadership to give up a quest to get nuclear weapons. North Korea broke every agreement made during that time.
So now, here we are. North Korea has nuclear weapons and has developed a delivery system for them. At this current stage in the âoegameâ North Korean missiles and the weapons he has are unreliable at best. They are also limited in size and power to fission devices, those equivalent of the Fat Man that was dropped on Nagasaki, or about 21 kilo tons.
Current estimates put North Korea's to about a dozen such weapons and a delivery system can reach all of Japan, Guam, and maybe the western seaboard of the United State. Even if he was to launch all of them now and they all work, as horrible as the results would be, they will be far worse if we don't do something now.
While you sheep keep bleating about Seoul and pursuing a path of appeasement North Korea will continue to develop is technology. They are already testing hydrogen bombs. Instead of kilotons we are taking mega tons. They are called city killers for a reason.
What do you do ten years down the road when he has hundreds of them and a reliable delivery system that can reach anywhere on the planet? What will you do when he sells some of them or the technology to Iran or the Islamic State? A terrorist organization that would think nothing of driving one in to any western city and setting it off.
Take off your TDS blinder and you will see that Trump is doing exactly what needs to be done. We cannot afford to appease this North Korean nut much longer. You are worried about Seoul. Trump is worried about Seoul, Tokyo, Gaum, Los Angeles, and the rest of the world.
But that is what you and people like with TDS can't stand. You are too much of coward to think for yourself and see things for how they really are. You are too much of a coward to admit that no matter what you say nothing will change reality. And that reality is Trump is doing just fine.
An stop trying to attribute something funny to Sun Tzu. You clearly haven't read his book enough to understand it.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.