Wall Street Journal’s Facebook Files series prompts comparisons to Big Tobacco Wall Street Journal’s Facebook Files series prompts comparisons to Big Tobacco

- Advertisement -

The Journal relied on the company’s internal documents it had obtained to show Facebook (American Plan) Knows “in serious detail” about the problems with its platforms. The mixed harms for users are well documented. But, in the words of the Journal, Facebook has “not fixed” the flaws.

So: Social platforms are addictive and often harmful. “It looks like Facebook is taking a page out of the Big Tobacco textbook — publicly masquerading as science while targeting teens with potentially dangerous products,” Democrat Sen. Richard Blumenthal told the Journal.

- Advertisement -

US Representative Ken Buck, a Republican, tweeted, “Big Tech has become the new Big Tobacco. Facebook is lying about how their product harms teens.”

The chain matters because it comes with evidence.” Time and again, the documents show, Facebook researchers have identified side effects of the platform. They say. “Despite periodic, congressional hearings, its own promises, and numerous media exposures, the company hasn’t fixed them. The documents paint perhaps the clearest picture ever of how Facebook’s problems inside the company were addressed by the CEO. Till how widely known. He himself.”
In relation to the company’s CEO, Friday’s story had his name in the headline: “How did Facebook influence Mark Zuckerberg’s bid? To get America vaccinated.”
here is To capture the entire range.

It was a huge week for the Journal. Is there more reporting work to do? Definitely. I believe the series has given newsrooms a jolt of inspiration, and it may not be the Journal’s last word on the Facebook files.


Facebook’s new response

The company’s response to the five-part series was measured during the work week. For example, Facebook could have deployed spokespersons and surrogates on TV shows, but it didn’t. I saw Joe Scarborough on MSNBC saying “Facebook reminds me of big tobacco,” because “they know their product is harmful to people.”

There was no denial from the company on his show.

But on Saturday, Facebook’s vice president of global affairs, Nick Clegg, issued a seven-paragraph blog Post, objecting to parts of the journal series.
“At the heart of this series is an allegation that is absolutely false: that Facebook conducts research and then systematically and deliberately ignores it if the findings are inconvenient to the company. It defeats the motives and hard work of thousands of researchers, policy experts, and Facebook engineers who strive to improve the quality of our products and understand their broader (positive and negative) impact.” Clegg said.
- Advertisement -

Clegg called the “objection” of Facebook’s motives. Perhaps responding to concerns from some observers that the company would stop conducting internal research because some of it was leaked to the journal, Clegg said, “We will continue to invest in research into these serious and complex issues. We are harder than ourselves.” Will continue to ask. Questions. And we will continue to improve our products and services as a result.”

He also focused on comparing Facebook to Big Tobacco. “The truth is that research on the impact of social media on people is still relatively nascent and developing, and social media itself is rapidly changing,” he said.

FB propaganda doesn’t happen in a vacuum

Journal reporter Jeff Horwitz, who has earned several accolades this week, tweeted Friday, “Some Facebook folks have told me we should pay more attention to how the interplay between social media and cable TV news has affected the company.” How it affected the public discussion of COVID vaccines, including the K platform.” He agreed with that assessment, he said.
Former Twitter and Facebook Executive Nu Wexler said They also agreed: “If we’re measuring the reach/engagement of health misinformation on FB, we need to compare it to the effect of Hannity’s nightly audience or a governor/senator saying similar things IRL. method is needed.”

further reading and listening

— “There’s a lot to unpack” from “Facebook Files,” writes Granthshala’s Alison Morrow. “But one thing that stands out is how clearly Facebook’s problems are documented using simple, observational prose not often found in internal communications in multinational corporations.”
– Washington Post columnist Will Ormus says he sees a pattern emerging: “Facebook continues to research its own pitfalls — and hides the findings.”
Friday’s “Files” story describes a gathering of Facebook leadership in and around its Menlo Park headquarters earlier this month, in which “the tone of some participants was, ‘We made the machine and we can’t control the machine,'” one of the people said. said.”
–David Kirkpatrick, who wrote the book “generally positive” (his words) about FB a decade ago, They say “The Journal series could speak of a major change even for those who are upset and expect nothing but plagiarism and nostalgia from this shockingly powerful company. Articles suggest that it has been widely accepted as a can be seen as an illegal enterprise.”
– The Atlantic’s Derek Thompson says the Journal series underscores that Social Media Is “Attention Alcohol:” Like alcohol, he says, “social media serves up an intoxicating cocktail of dopamine, disorientation, and, for some, dependence.”
— Journal on Monday will conduct a live Q&A With several journalists about the findings of “Facebook Files”. There is also a companion podcast series on Spotify.
A version of this article was first published in the “Trusted Sources” newspaper. You can sign up right here for free.


Credit : www.cnn.com

- Advertisement -
Mail Us For  DMCA / Credit  Notice

Recent Articles

Stay on top - Get the daily news in your inbox

Related Stories