Journalists who cover Facebook and bristle at their haughty disdain and/or patronizing condescension, consider this illustrative example from Daniel Ellsberg, discussing a conversation he had with Kissinger. The problem is with asymmetric information.https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2010/02/daniel-ellsberg-limitations-knowledge/ …
-
-
As someone who has hands-on experience with creating an ad on Facebook and has spoke to someone on the Facebook's Public Policy team, there are also people *within* FB who don't know how their ads work (FYI - I don't blame those individuals). This too is a problem.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Obviously expecting FB to be able to moderate all user-generated content is unrealistic but it seems that there is a straightforward moral argument that they should (and could) be responsible for content that people are paying them to surface to users.
-
It seems to me by rolling the issue into a whole, thorny 'freedom of speech across social media' debate, rather than covering at paid political ads on Facebook as a specific issue, journalists basically give Facebook a free pass not to fix anything.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.

