Slashdot Mirror
Facebook, Twitter Execs Admit Failures, Warn of 'Overwhelming' Threat To Elections (gizmodo.com)
Openly recognizing their companies' past failures in rare displays of modesty, Facebook and Twitter executives touted new efforts to combat state-sponsored propaganda across their platforms before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Wednesday, acknowledging that the task is often "overwhelming" and proving a massive drain on their resources. Gizmodo: In opening remarks on Wednesday, Facebook's chief operating officer, Sheryl Sandberg, acknowledged that Facebook had been "too slow to act" in 2016 against the Kremlin-backed campaign that was designed to sow discord among American voters. "That's on us," she said, describing Moscow's meddling as "completely unacceptable" and a violation of Facebook's values "and of the country we love." "We're investing for the long term because security is never a finished job," Sandberg added, noting that Facebook has increased its security and communications staff to 20,000 people, doubling it over the past year. "Our adversaries are determined, creative, and well-funded," she said. "But we are even more determined -- and we will continue to fight back."
Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, meanwhile, portrayed the matter as not just a threat to democracy, but as a threat to the overall health and security of his business, saying that above all else, Twitter's goal is to serve a "global public conversation." Dorsey also acknowledged a range of threats faced by his company, including widespread abuse, manipulation by foreign powers, and "malicious automation" (i.e., bots). "Any attempts to undermine the integrity of our service is antithetical to our fundamental rights," he said, calling freedom of expression a "core tenant" upon which the Twitter is based. Google, which was also asked to appear before the committee, chose not to do so. An empty chair was left at the table next to Sandberg and Dorsey to signify Google's absence.
Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, meanwhile, portrayed the matter as not just a threat to democracy, but as a threat to the overall health and security of his business, saying that above all else, Twitter's goal is to serve a "global public conversation." Dorsey also acknowledged a range of threats faced by his company, including widespread abuse, manipulation by foreign powers, and "malicious automation" (i.e., bots). "Any attempts to undermine the integrity of our service is antithetical to our fundamental rights," he said, calling freedom of expression a "core tenant" upon which the Twitter is based. Google, which was also asked to appear before the committee, chose not to do so. An empty chair was left at the table next to Sandberg and Dorsey to signify Google's absence.
The only current threat is THEIR censorship of political opposition who they are intolerant of.
Either they support free speech or they do not.
Oh yes russian interference is worst issue in the world because we support this vaguely anti-trump narrative... but let's not talk about how we shit on our user's privacy for profit because we are modest!
love is just extroverted narcissism
Suddenly these Irish companies pretend to care about America, the land that gave them everything to start their business. America is also the country they refuse to pay their fair share of taxes to, and the country who's political dysfunction they knowingly and intentionally made worse, while profiting by selling propaganda to their own userbase, purchased by foreign enemies. Spare me your crocodile tears. They only care that they got caught, since it puts their profits at risk to face additional regulation.
"We acknowledge our failure to totally silence US Conservatives (labeled as "state actors", "Nazis", "White Supremacists" etc for the convenience of this political purge) but promise to de-platform all opposition voices to Progressive viewpoints and politicians before the next election."
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
So, Russia placed misinformation on social networks, and who do we believe that swayed? I've yet to see a single study, or even anyone claiming, those ads and fake news reports actually had an effect on the election, i.e., convinced voters to choose one candidate over another. Isn't that something that should be studied?
Seems to me, the only people who'd gravitate to the type of fake news and misinformation being put out during the 2016 campaign were those already staunchly in their political corners.
An honest effort to fight foreign state influence would be fine, I suppose, but as we know, this is being used as a Trojan horse for the tech executives to simply further their own political predilections.
(Also, if our elections could truly be determined by Facebook ads and tweets, we would be doomed anyway.)
When will Facebook act on the Left-stream media sowing discord with lies about police shootings; relentless attacks on the President; whitewashing of the criminals, especially of the immigrant variety and on and on?
The 24/7 attacks on Trump back in the 2015-2016 election season by the mass-media including by the NY Times partially owned by Carlos Slim (foreigner) is just fine but a handful of FB ads is the end of the world.
I don't respond to or upvote ACs
The US has a long history of meddling in foreign elections. The US also has a long history of broadcasting radio into the East Bloc. And under the First Amendment, Americans have a right to hear the views and speech of foreigners.
How about worrying about the activities of the US government vis-a-vis US citizens? This is what Edward Bernays, the founder of US public relations had to say, about US government propaganda:
The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country
And the CIA appears to have been manipulating news media in the US since the 1950s as part of Operation Mockingbird:
According to writer Deborah Davis, Operation Mockingbird recruited leading American journalists into a propaganda network and oversaw the operations of front groups. CIA support of front groups was exposed after a 1967 Ramparts magazine article reported that the National Student Association received funding from the CIA. In the 1970s, Congressional investigations and reports also revealed Agency connections with journalists and civic groups. None of these reports, however, mentions an Operation Mockingbird coordinating or supporting these activities.
Facebook is committed to answer to the US government as it is an American company and conducts business under its regulatory control.
But what about in countries where almost the entire citizenry relies on Facebook as its primary source of information? One of these is the Philippines, where once tabloids and tv dominated, today Facebook is THE biggest medium to disseminate information, thanks to the mobile phone and subsidized access to Facebook courtesy of the telco duopoly.
Duterte's campaign team used it to propel a known murderer into the presidency, whereby he immediately implemented his War on Drugs which has since claimed over 12,000 lives. His first two years in office has also seen the economy plummet to new lows, with inflation at its highest in close to a decade and currently the highest in asia.
And now that Duterte's social media propaganda is state-sponsored, you can then understand why his approval ratings are the highest in history. This is even if his sound bites make Trump sound like Anne Frank in comparison (even more so in the vernacular).
I am unsure if Facebook will be able to fix itself because if it doesn't, you can very well imagine what the consequences are for Filipinos.
Let's take a look at the issues Facebook is facing.
1. Fake news
2. Political ads by foreign powers
3. Censorship because of political views
4. Egregious selling of personal data to advertisers
The first two are difficult to detect because they are fake stories/ads posing as real ones. You have to think that with all the engineers Facebook has that they would have at least tried to solve this problem. But Facebook has really taken the position in the past that they really don't care. That is until their stock got slammed last month. Now they care.
The last two are within Facebook's control but chooses to ignore the problem because of political bias or outright greed. Greed is good, right?
Google had the motto of "don't be evil". Facebook's motto is "we just don't care".
What is puzzling about it?
The people running Facebook and Twitter are progressives who believe that more government regulation is a good thing (and for them, it is). They are "admitting" this in order to gin up calls for regulations on their industry. Regulations on social media sites would lock new competitors out.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison