Facebook and Google helped them better target fear-mongering videos showing "France and Germany overrun by sharia law"—to get the ad money.https://twitter.com/liamdenning/status/920601343664054272 …
-
-
Yes. But it's public (can be countered), expensive, and not effective. FB & Google, moved from alchemy to chemistry. https://twitter.com/JeremyOwens_/status/920655640619515905 …
This Tweet is unavailable.Show this thread -
Not just, but certainly many orders of magnitude more. But core problem is that we're the product—not the customer.https://twitter.com/JoeBeOne/status/920656918217220101 …
Show this thread -
When I say it's the business model, I don't mean they're greedily counting $$ from white supremacists. I mean it's the structure they set up
Show this thread -
It would be an easier problem if the problem was reducible to blatant ill-intent. It is related to intent, but in ways they set things up.
Show this thread -
Yes, no difference between public speech and surveillance-based, hidden ad-targeting + algo amplification. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯https://twitter.com/baekdal/status/920693640632131586 …
Show this thread -
This is about monetizing surveillance and attention in a submerged, privatized "public-sphere", not speech. Enough with the 19th century.
Show this thread -
It's uncomfortable and complex but deliberate misinformation may be speech—but it's often also a form of censorship. https://twitter.com/aaronhuertas/status/920692434119557121 …
This Tweet is unavailable.Show this thread
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.