Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox Business)   Zuck will not be bullied by corporations, plans to keep Facebook as a haven for hate speech. Figures the ad money will return if he can help shape another election by spreading misinformation to older voters   (foxbusiness.com) divider line
    More: Repeat, Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, newsworthy label, Facebook spokesperson, policy changes, kind of content, President Trump  
•       •       •

1572 clicks; posted to Main » and Business » on 02 Jul 2020 at 10:16 AM (17 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



79 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2020-07-02 9:41:04 AM  
The thing is, with most people, I don't think Facebook is "convincing" them of anything they didn't already subscribe to.  It just allows people with dip-shiat, emotionally driven beliefs to group together and embolden each other.  And that group becomes so solid that no actual facts or proof or logic will penetrate it.  Even if one of them, a family member, friend from high school, whatever, is arguing the negative against five people in a news feed, they *know* the group is there for them to fall back to.
 
2020-07-02 10:23:03 AM  
Hatebook
 
2020-07-02 10:23:14 AM  
Arguing on Facebook is its own punishment.

Unlike arguing on FARK.
 
2020-07-02 10:23:46 AM  
Either Zuckerberg is correct and the advertisers will be back or the advertisers will realize that all the money spent on Facebook ads was just a waste of money. If that happens look for more companies to wise up about how they spend their advertising dollars, how effective ads are, and whether these companies really need a presence on Facebook.
 
2020-07-02 10:24:11 AM  
I"m sure russia and china will happily continue to shovel him money to drive a wedge between our citizens. Not that we need a lot of help.
 
2020-07-02 10:24:22 AM  
Fox News has become like a big, stupid St. Bernard puppy that comes galumphing in excitedly with every dead animal it finds.
 
2020-07-02 10:24:24 AM  
TFA headline: Zuckerberg says advertising boycott won't change Facebook's principles

Can't change what you don't have.
 
2020-07-02 10:24:39 AM  
That's a nice brave act boyo. We'll see if you keep saying that when the share price is going down hard. My guess is you'll knuckle under to stay rich.
 
2020-07-02 10:24:56 AM  

UberDave: The thing is, with most people, I don't think Facebook is "convincing" them of anything they didn't already subscribe to.  It just allows people with dip-shiat, emotionally driven beliefs to group together and embolden each other.  And that group becomes so solid that no actual facts or proof or logic will penetrate it.  Even if one of them, a family member, friend from high school, whatever, is arguing the negative against five people in a news feed, they *know* the group is there for them to fall back to.


So like Fark?
 
2020-07-02 10:26:33 AM  

jso2897: Fox News has become like a big, stupid St. Bernard puppy that comes galumphing in excitedly with every dead animal it finds.


Don't farking insult St. Bernards like that. They're a million times better than fox will ever be.
 
2020-07-02 10:28:15 AM  
The thing is, Facebook isn't reliant on big businesses to advertise with them. Literally on the order of 80% of their money comes from small businesses that have nowhere else to turn.

Good work if you can get it.
 
2020-07-02 10:29:24 AM  
American Teenagers don't use the FaceBooks any more. The company knows it doesn't have a long-term strategy for growth in the West, so they need to milk the elderly and the gullible who click, click, click the bullshiat fake news while they still can. Of course, gullible young people in foreign countries (India?) are a huge cash cow for the foreseeable future. They love their fake news there, too.
 
2020-07-02 10:29:32 AM  
So you guys all realize this is a fake narrative right? Facebook has been notorious for disenfranchising the right on their platform. Now they're being accused of helping the right and disenfranchising the left? Something isn't right here. We are being lied to our faces. Who can really sit here and feel confident that these corporations really have us in mind, especially after keeping up with recent news cycles that have been contradictory to this manufactured narrative.
 
2020-07-02 10:29:34 AM  
This news is giving me a really painful migraine.  I need to go to the ER at Zuckerberg General.
 
2020-07-02 10:29:51 AM  

runwiz: Either Zuckerberg is correct and the advertisers will be back or the advertisers will realize that all the money spent on Facebook ads was just a waste of money. If that happens look for more companies to wise up about how they spend their advertising dollars, how effective ads are, and whether these companies really need a presence on Facebook.


I'm not defending any of this malarkey but aren't there plenty of products that certain people will want to be advertised about to go around to every type of demographic
 
2020-07-02 10:30:26 AM  

UberDave: The thing is, with most people, I don't think Facebook is "convincing" them of anything they didn't already subscribe to.  It just allows people with dip-shiat, emotionally driven beliefs to group together and embolden each other.  And that group becomes so solid that no actual facts or proof or logic will penetrate it.  Even if one of them, a family member, friend from high school, whatever, is arguing the negative against five people in a news feed, they *know* the group is there for them to fall back to.


Aaannnddd......this always comes to mind......

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-07-02 10:30:28 AM  

holdmybones: I"m sure russia and china will happily continue to shovel him money to drive a wedge between our citizens. Not that we need a lot of help.


Oh yeah I'd so make friends with racist white people if it wasn't for Facebook
 
2020-07-02 10:31:01 AM  

BFletch651: Arguing on Facebook is its own punishment.

Unlike arguing on FARK.


I've learned a LOT over the years, arguing on Fark. We have some really smart, educated folks around these parts.

And - no exaggeration - those conversations over the years were a key part of me deciding to no longer be a "conservative" Republican as I'd been raised, and instead work my way in to where I am today on the political left somewhere on the spectrum of the left around Bernie Sanders.
 
2020-07-02 10:31:05 AM  

Daddy's Big Pink Man-Squirrel: TFA headline: Zuckerberg says advertising boycott won't change Facebook's principles

Can't change what you don't have.


If you're a corporation in America making money you have no principles
 
2020-07-02 10:32:05 AM  

Alwysadydrmr: jso2897: Fox News has become like a big, stupid St. Bernard puppy that comes galumphing in excitedly with every dead animal it finds.

Don't farking insult St. Bernards like that. They're a million times better than fox will ever be.


Especially the ones with little barrels of booze
 
2020-07-02 10:32:32 AM  

halifaxdatageek: The thing is, Facebook isn't reliant on big businesses to advertise with them. Literally on the order of 80% of their money comes from small businesses that have nowhere else to turn.

Good work if you can get it.


Went and got the specific numbers:
- $70bn in ads
- 8m advertisers
- Top 100 responsible for less than 20% of revenue (as compared to, say, network television, where the top 100 provide closer to 70%)

https://espresso.economist.com/77e86f​5​489a21d225ec448dce1fec3a7
 
2020-07-02 10:33:09 AM  
Good. The liberal left has broadened their definition of "hate speech" to the point of absurdity, and freedom of speech is only okay as long as you agree with them.

I don't use Facebook nor care for Zuckerburg, but kudos to him for standing up against the stupidity and supporting free speech. He is correct and advertisers will be back. They certainly don't have a problem advertising in countries like China
 
2020-07-02 10:33:50 AM  

ThieveryCorp: So you guys all realize this is a fake narrative right? Facebook has been notorious for disenfranchising the right on their platform. Now they're being accused of helping the right and disenfranchising the left? Something isn't right here. We are being lied to our faces. Who can really sit here and feel confident that these corporations really have us in mind, especially after keeping up with recent news cycles that have been contradictory to this manufactured narrative.


Money money baller baller bling bling
America is about capitalism
There's no left or right

There's

second quarter earnings
 
2020-07-02 10:34:32 AM  

Artist: UberDave: The thing is, with most people, I don't think Facebook is "convincing" them of anything they didn't already subscribe to.  It just allows people with dip-shiat, emotionally driven beliefs to group together and embolden each other.  And that group becomes so solid that no actual facts or proof or logic will penetrate it.  Even if one of them, a family member, friend from high school, whatever, is arguing the negative against five people in a news feed, they *know* the group is there for them to fall back to.

Aaannnddd......this always comes to mind......

[Fark user image image 850x637]


The collective from Star wars next generation
 
2020-07-02 10:35:47 AM  

Sumo Surfer: Good. The liberal left has broadened their definition of "hate speech" to the point of absurdity, and freedom of speech is only okay as long as you agree with them.

I don't use Facebook nor care for Zuckerburg, but kudos to him for standing up against the stupidity and supporting free speech. He is correct and advertisers will be back. They certainly don't have a problem advertising in countries like China


Hate is not speech we've just convinced ourselves that is
 
2020-07-02 10:38:02 AM  

waxbeans: Artist: UberDave: The thing is, with most people, I don't think Facebook is "convincing" them of anything they didn't already subscribe to.  It just allows people with dip-shiat, emotionally driven beliefs to group together and embolden each other.  And that group becomes so solid that no actual facts or proof or logic will penetrate it.  Even if one of them, a family member, friend from high school, whatever, is arguing the negative against five people in a news feed, they *know* the group is there for them to fall back to.

Aaannnddd......this always comes to mind......

[Fark user image image 850x637]

The collective from Star wars next generation


"Star wars next generation"?  That's either matter-antimatter level trolling, or else one of the best brainfarts ever!
 
2020-07-02 10:39:17 AM  
Wait, let me understand this, Clinton won nearly 3 million MORE votes than Trump, and yet FB swayed the election?  Seems like Hillary was a little weak in her Electoral College strategy.

After COVID, I wonder if the dense (in both ways) Blue Cities will start thinning out, redistributing Blue voters across the states?

If those nearly 3 million votes (most of the extra votes being in CA, as 50%+1 was all that was needed for 54 EVs) were dropped into Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan, Clinton would be President.

But of course it was the fault of Russia, Ukraine, Facebook.
 
2020-07-02 10:41:10 AM  

waxbeans: Sumo Surfer: Good. The liberal left has broadened their definition of "hate speech" to the point of absurdity, and freedom of speech is only okay as long as you agree with them.

I don't use Facebook nor care for Zuckerburg, but kudos to him for standing up against the stupidity and supporting free speech. He is correct and advertisers will be back. They certainly don't have a problem advertising in countries like China

Hate is not speech we've just convinced ourselves that is

 
2020-07-02 10:41:27 AM  

Random Anonymous Blackmail: UberDave: The thing is, with most people, I don't think Facebook is "convincing" them of anything they didn't already subscribe to.  It just allows people with dip-shiat, emotionally driven beliefs to group together and embolden each other.  And that group becomes so solid that no actual facts or proof or logic will penetrate it.  Even if one of them, a family member, friend from high school, whatever, is arguing the negative against five people in a news feed, they *know* the group is there for them to fall back to.

So like Fark?


There are plenty of people who are on-the-edge because of issues unrelated to politics or hate.  Facebook helps these people empathize with other people who are going through similar things.  The problem is these "friends" created scapegoats for their problems.  If their having trouble with their wife, it's because things were better when women didn't work.  That turns into a belief that women are inferior.  Like guns?  Well guess what?  You can justify yourself by pointing out how someone you only learned about because someone copied and pasted their story on Facebook, was robbed by a Black man and wouldn't have been if they had a modified AR-15.  Suddenly, Black people are a problem than needs to be controlled with LAW AND ORDER!!!

Facebook makes money when their users interact with ads and when their is a perception that advertising on Facebook helps create awareness.  Facebook has identified conservatives as easy marks.  So, it amplifies the amount of extremist content they see.  How do you sell a "TRUMP 2020:  NO MORE BULLSHIAT" flag?  You convince someone to go to the All Lives Matter counter protest and sell them one at your booth.  The deeper the divisions, the more energized the users will be about spending money to support their side.  I won't buy a MAGA hat, but I'll buy one with a thin blue line and a Punisher logo because I saw a meme that said "Nobody ever got arrested for not doing anything illegal." - which on it's surface is bullshiat, but the division is so great the conservatives are blind to it's ridiculousness.
 
2020-07-02 10:42:26 AM  
Facebook is an echo chamber, not a think tank. Zuck's right about the advertisers returning. They're playing the virtue signaling game to keep activists off their a$$e$ for a month while they save some money on digital ad spends. All of this will be smoke by mid-July.
 
2020-07-02 10:42:41 AM  

baronm: waxbeans: Artist: UberDave: The thing is, with most people, I don't think Facebook is "convincing" them of anything they didn't already subscribe to.  It just allows people with dip-shiat, emotionally driven beliefs to group together and embolden each other.  And that group becomes so solid that no actual facts or proof or logic will penetrate it.  Even if one of them, a family member, friend from high school, whatever, is arguing the negative against five people in a news feed, they *know* the group is there for them to fall back to.

Aaannnddd......this always comes to mind......

[Fark user image image 850x637]

The collective from Star wars next generation

"Star wars next generation"?  That's either matter-antimatter level trolling, or else one of the best brainfarts ever!


All of the above.
About to be 10 am my time.
Got a good buzz going.
I use voice to text.
Meant to say Star trek.
I'm pretty sure I did say Star trek.
Saw that it  was Star wars

But not soon enough
And part of me was meh
 
2020-07-02 10:43:05 AM  
So many news rooms are dead because Facebook lied about their numbers to advertisers and they had a pittance of a fine for it
 
2020-07-02 10:43:32 AM  

UberDave: The thing is, with most people, I don't think Facebook is "convincing" them of anything they didn't already subscribe to.  It just allows people with dip-shiat, emotionally driven beliefs to group together and embolden each other.  And that group becomes so solid that no actual facts or proof or logic will penetrate it.  Even if one of them, a family member, friend from high school, whatever, is arguing the negative against five people in a news feed, they *know* the group is there for them to fall back to.


Early intervention can help.  At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, one of my friends shared two Facebook posts, one claiming that we were being lied to because certain cleaning products released prior to the pandemic claimed to kill coronaviruses, another arguing that the lockdown was the first step toward making people voluntarily surrender their freedom.  Fortunately, several of her friends (including me) called her out on those posts, and none of her other friends came to her defense.  She now rarely posts about COVID-19, but the few things she's posted since then have all been grounded in reality.

The problem is that most people start going down the proverbial rabbit hole long before they start openly talking about it.  One could spend months or even years reading e.g. Breitbart and becoming radicalized without telling anyone, and by the time they feel comfortable publicly sharing it, it's too late to change their minds with facts.
 
2020-07-02 10:46:07 AM  
So its time for plan b then? burn all facebook offices across  the country to the ground?


or would he still act like an idiot at that point
 
2020-07-02 10:46:53 AM  

altomah: waxbeans: Sumo Surfer: Good. The liberal left has broadened their definition of "hate speech" to the point of absurdity, and freedom of speech is only okay as long as you agree with them.

I don't use Facebook nor care for Zuckerburg, but kudos to him for standing up against the stupidity and supporting free speech. He is correct and advertisers will be back. They certainly don't have a problem advertising in countries like China

Hate is not speech we've just convinced ourselves that is



Facebook is the worlds largest publisher.

I can't buy a radio spot claiming that the doctors in my city are lying to the public to implant a microchip into out children.  The radio station won't sell me that ad because it's libellous.

I can't buy a TV ad to proclaim the superiority of the white race and call for white people to put down protesters like dogs in the street - they won't sell me that ad because it invites violence.

But Facebook will sell you that ad. They are pretending they are not the worlds largest publisher....while selling ads in the worlds largest publication.

They need tot be held to the same laws as every Publisher and hold them legally accountable for the contnt they publish.
 
2020-07-02 10:50:45 AM  
Shady product marketers know if they want to get their advertising in front of the dumbest, most credulous simpletons out there, Facebook is by far the best way to go.  Even better than Fox News, and that's saying something.
 
2020-07-02 10:54:35 AM  
"Increasingly, we're getting called to censor a lot of different kinds of content that makes me really uncomfortable. I think it kind of feels like the list of things that you are not allowed to say socially keeps on growing. And I'm not really okay with that," he said in January at the Silicon Slopes Tech Summit. "We're going to take down the content that's really harmful, but the line needs to be held at some point."


I despise Facebook for a number of reasons and deleted my account a while ago but I actually agree with him on this. I'm very anti-censorship, always have been and always will be. Celebrating banned books week and all that. I think that intent and context needs to be considered in all situations. If a group is out there actually inciting hate or spreading lies based on gender or race than go on and taken them down. But if someone is posting something that is clearly mocking racists or uses questionable language because it's an academic essay discussing how language changes over the centuries, no. Also, some of the things people want labeled as hate speech are getting absolutely ridiculous. A friend of mine got a 3 day ban because she used the word "weirdo" to describe a rude woman she'd witnessed yelling at a cashier and someone reported it as ableist language. There has to be a line. A vague "we want you to ban hate speech" without a very clearly established definition of what that means is kind of uncomfortable when words that have nothing to do with race, gender, health or age suddenly become problematic.
 
2020-07-02 10:59:46 AM  

altomah: altomah: waxbeans: Sumo Surfer: Good. The liberal left has broadened their definition of "hate speech" to the point of absurdity, and freedom of speech is only okay as long as you agree with them.

I don't use Facebook nor care for Zuckerburg, but kudos to him for standing up against the stupidity and supporting free speech. He is correct and advertisers will be back. They certainly don't have a problem advertising in countries like China

Hate is not speech we've just convinced ourselves that is


Facebook is the worlds largest publisher.

I can't buy a radio spot claiming that the doctors in my city are lying to the public to implant a microchip into out children.  The radio station won't sell me that ad because it's libellous.

I can't buy a TV ad to proclaim the superiority of the white race and call for white people to put down protesters like dogs in the street - they won't sell me that ad because it invites violence.

But Facebook will sell you that ad. They are pretending they are not the worlds largest publisher....while selling ads in the worlds largest publication.

They need tot be held to the same laws as every Publisher and hold them legally accountable for the contnt they publish.


Meh.
If people are taking things on the internet serious. So be it.  Kills people? Meh!
The government made the internet real. And people made it real.
And they did it to make money.
That isn't Facebook fault.
ALSO, we don't stand up for our self there is always one ass that lets a prospective employer ask them for their Facebook.
Scabs ruin the world.
if people will not  unionize and stand up against the powers-that-be they deserve to be crushed and killed by the powers-that-be if that power to be happens to be Facebook so be it.
 
2020-07-02 11:00:55 AM  
I cannot farking wait for his principals to collide with shareholder interest & actual farking profits.  If I was in any position to control a large marketing budget, I would keep my money off facebook just for the sake of forcing Zuckerberg to eat his words. He's not operating on some vision quest, he's mining user data to sell advertising space. He's not a farking profit. Christ, what an asshole.

/end rant
 
2020-07-02 11:13:20 AM  
He's already negotiating with the Citrical and My pillow people.
 
2020-07-02 11:17:43 AM  

anfrind: UberDave: The thing is, with most people, I don't think Facebook is "convincing" them of anything they didn't already subscribe to.  It just allows people with dip-shiat, emotionally driven beliefs to group together and embolden each other.  And that group becomes so solid that no actual facts or proof or logic will penetrate it.  Even if one of them, a family member, friend from high school, whatever, is arguing the negative against five people in a news feed, they *know* the group is there for them to fall back to.

Early intervention can help.  At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, one of my friends shared two Facebook posts, one claiming that we were being lied to because certain cleaning products released prior to the pandemic claimed to kill coronaviruses, another arguing that the lockdown was the first step toward making people voluntarily surrender their freedom.  Fortunately, several of her friends (including me) called her out on those posts, and none of her other friends came to her defense.  She now rarely posts about COVID-19, but the few things she's posted since then have all been grounded in reality.

The problem is that most people start going down the proverbial rabbit hole long before they start openly talking about it.  One could spend months or even years reading e.g. Breitbart and becoming radicalized without telling anyone, and by the time they feel comfortable publicly sharing it, it's too late to change their minds with facts.


People are tribal. They want to belong to something. Fortunately, your friend came over to the smart tribe. Good on you for showing her the facts, before the stupid ate too far into her.
 
2020-07-02 11:20:12 AM  
Why do all these guys have such punchable faces?
 
2020-07-02 11:29:51 AM  

Sumo Surfer: Good. The liberal left has broadened their definition of "hate speech" to the point of absurdity, and freedom of speech is only okay as long as you agree with them.

I don't use Facebook nor care for Zuckerburg, but kudos to him for standing up against the stupidity and supporting free speech. He is correct and advertisers will be back. They certainly don't have a problem advertising in countries like China


People who are to moronic to understand a simple concept like Free Speech, are in fact, morons, like you.
 
2020-07-02 11:33:18 AM  
It truly is the end of the world. I'm on the side of Facebook.


The largest companies on the internet have been regulating speech for the last 10 years, are there any positive results from this? I mean sure the Little Gobbels podcast can't raise their 50 dollars a month via PayPal if people protest enough, but has the attempt to curb hate speech had any effect in curbing rl hate?
 
2020-07-02 11:38:44 AM  

inglixthemad: That's a nice brave act boyo. We'll see if you keep saying that when the share price is going down hard. My guess is you'll knuckle under to stay rich.


I hope the Board of Directors will step in soon.  FB has already lost something like $60B in market capital, and the BoD has a fiduciary duty to rein in a rogue CEO.  They don't act, they get sued by the other shareholders.  Zuck won't pay; the Directors will.

Oh, to see Zuck booted as the CEO of his baby...
 
2020-07-02 11:42:46 AM  

stuffy: Why do all these guys have such punchable faces?


Maybe the qualities of being a decent person are stored in the chin? Mind you, Jay Leno would have to be the exception that proves the rule
 
2020-07-02 11:53:46 AM  

DevilGirlFromMars: "Increasingly, we're getting called to censor a lot of different kinds of content that makes me really uncomfortable. I think it kind of feels like the list of things that you are not allowed to say socially keeps on growing. And I'm not really okay with that," he said in January at the Silicon Slopes Tech Summit. "We're going to take down the content that's really harmful, but the line needs to be held at some point."


I despise Facebook for a number of reasons and deleted my account a while ago but I actually agree with him on this. I'm very anti-censorship, always have been and always will be. Celebrating banned books week and all that. I think that intent and context needs to be considered in all situations. If a group is out there actually inciting hate or spreading lies based on gender or race than go on and taken them down. But if someone is posting something that is clearly mocking racists or uses questionable language because it's an academic essay discussing how language changes over the centuries, no. Also, some of the things people want labeled as hate speech are getting absolutely ridiculous. A friend of mine got a 3 day ban because she used the word "weirdo" to describe a rude woman she'd witnessed yelling at a cashier and someone reported it as ableist language. There has to be a line. A vague "we want you to ban hate speech" without a very clearly established definition of what that means is kind of uncomfortable when words that have nothing to do with race, gender, health or age suddenly become problematic.


I agree with you on this and I applaud Facebook for taking a stand on this issue, regardless of how I feel about them in any other sense.

I've learned that, in my opinion, the problem with the debate today is that very few people truly understand what it is they are talking about and so we end up talking about two very different things. This is why when I begin a debate one of the first questions I will ask is:

Do you believe that Science is the search for the truth, or do you believe Science is the search to disprove the truth?

This question is fundamental in developing a common framework to have the current debate and most people I encounter don't even understand why that is. This, to me is sad because the entire premise of their argument is based upon how they answer this question and if that question is truly examined, I have a feeling they might  answer it differently.

With the ever widening definition of what constitutes "hate speech" and the social media platforms beginning to enforce them in their censorship, it almost forces us to talk and yell over each other because we cannot establish a common framework from which to debate.
 
2020-07-02 12:01:17 PM  
Facebook is well on its way to being the next MySpace... good riddance.
 
2020-07-02 12:05:58 PM  
Time to stop using face book.  If you are anti trump, and you should be, you MUST delete your Facebook account.  And if you are in a state like CA, have FB erase your data.
 
2020-07-02 12:15:00 PM  

AmbassadorBooze: Time to stop using face book.  If you are anti trump, and you should be, you MUST delete your Facebook account.  And if you are in a state like CA, have FB erase your data.


Is there a reason your natural inclination was to tell everyone else what to do and how they should be thinking instead of just expressing your view and assuming everyone else on this site has their own agency and can make decisions on their own?
 
Displayed 50 of 79 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.