Criticism is growing against Facebook after former worker Frances Haugen revealed internal documents and testified before the U.S. Security and Exchange Commission and U.S. Congress.
For many years observers have been saying that social media platforms thrive on a business model which uses programs to amplify extreme views to maximize attention. Facebook was considered a leader in this regard. There is growing consensus that some kind of regulation is necessary. Some suggest transparency in the form of making algorithms open to public view. (See article linked below.) While free software advocates have been campaigning for such things for decades, it seems that the calls for reform and regulation are coming from people without much knowledge of free software philosophy. It looks like a nice time to direct people to free software philosophy documents which discuss the importance of openness. --- Opinion: Facebook's promises of reform aren't reassuring. They're a sick joke. Opinion by Eugene Robinson - The Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/10/04/facebooks-promises-reform-arent-reassuring-theyre-sick-joke/ After whistleblower Frances Haugen unleashed a torrent of unflattering revelations about Facebook in the Wall Street Journal and on CBS's "60 Minutes," the social media giant pledged to "tackle the spread of misinformation and harmful content." But as long as the social network makes money off such garbage, such a promise comes across as a sick joke rather than reassurance. I've never been a fervent Facebook hater, though I've also never been an everyday user. I've spent time with some of Facebook's top executives (not including founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg) and I've found them to be bright, personable and excellent at projecting social consciousness. Their products, however, are very different. Haugen's leaks make clear just how vast the gap is between the friendly facade and the ugly reality. Haugen worked at Facebook as part of a team that was supposed to figure out how to stop the platform from being used to interfere in elections. She left after two years, disappointed and disillusioned. After reading the Journal's series of articles and watching the "60 Minutes" interview, it's hard to avoid the conclusion that "misinformation and harmful content" are a feature of the platform, not a bug.