[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

There is no news on Facebook or Youtube. One is a social media similar to TOTV where people trade posts and memes. Youtube is a site that has video's made by a lot of different people but most aware older people don't give credence to the "lecturers" on youtube. We run like hell or ignore anyone's post with you tube in it. Many get their "news" from the sites on their computer from Microsoft Media and boy is it slanted. MSN chooses what THEY want to put up. MSN also does polls and that is a laugh too. There are always "screening" questions that immediately put you in a group THEY choose and then you see how their selected group answers.

OBB is correct that we are not as computer literate as younger people but we aren't completely out of it either.

People are fans of Facebook because of the links to the people and friends and family that they know and they can enjoy talking with them and seeing what they are doing every day. I have never read any news on Facebook from Facebook. Sometimes you see things if you follow certain things like Brietbart. ( I don't). I have read opinions from other people and many have no knowledge as to what is a "credible source". They often quote off the wall sources. And then Facebook will tell them it is incorrect information. I am glad Facebook does that. I have no quarrel with that at all. I have never been corrected but some are and they are angry. It doesn't change anything. They still think they are right.

It is clear you really haven't used Facebook.

It's REALLY clear that -you- don't know much about Facebook. All networks give regular LIVE updates on all sorts of things, from weather emergencies to political rallies, and everything inbetween.

I watched an inauguration of an elected official on Facebook when I was living in CT, while it was happening live. It was covered by the local news stations and livestreamed.

Livestreaming is a thing. It means you're watching something while it is happening. And ALL major networks provide livestreaming to one extent or another on Facebook.

That is where I get a lot of my news. From livestreaming.

[shut the front door]

Originally Posted by Bucco

Facebook warned on Monday that it would block users and news organizations in Australia from sharing local and international news stories on its social network and Instagram if the country passed a proposed code of conduct aimed at curbing the power of Facebook and Google.

This from NY Times Australia

Nteresting how the world now works

Whoops! So much for "no news on FB". It's all over FB, more than I want to see!

[Bucco]

All of the Big Tech companies claim their primary mission is to change the world for the better. They’ve certainly fulfilled half of this goal. Consider some of the ways the world has changed since the rise of Silicon Valley:

According to the CDC, the youth suicide rate in this country increased by 56% between 2007 and 2017.
Americans are more politically divided than ever. We’re currently witnessing levels of social unrest not seen since the ‘60s (pick your century — 1960s or 1860s).
Income inequality has never been higher.
In Myanmar, military personnel used Facebook to incite genocide against ethnic minorities.
Jeff Orlowski’s new documentary The Social Dilemma offers a terrifying peak behind the Silicon curtain. Despite some corny dramatizations, the film features powerful interviews with Big Tech defectors who expose the industry’s only real objective: manipulating human behavior for profit.

Mark Zuckerberg's Pro-Democracy Claims Are a Farce - InsideHook

To me, while I do understand the use to stay in touch, but it's a dangerous place to call "home".

Seems to me we are abandoning truth, accepting lies and any conspiracy theory that feeds what we want.

A state GOP senator in Pennsylvania once told me that "democracy is hard work". Part of that is first caring about the truth, learning how to recognize it, keep searching for it.

I learned early that if I wanted a government that I was proud of, I needed to work at it.

It seems to me, and this is just my opinion, that until something happens to wake us up, we will continue to accept untruths and conspiracy theories because it is easier than caring.

That also reminds me of another phrase that I was not around to hear first hand by Jefferson..."The government you elect is government you deserve.''" nor this similar "Joseph de Maistre: ""Every country has the government it deserves""

We seem to get comfort now from being against things instead of being for something. Opens the door for manipulation

Sorry...I just love my country a lot

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Correlation doesn't equal causation, Bucco, you know this.

According to the CDC, the youth suicide rate in this country increased by 56% between 2007 and 2017.
Social media predates the increase of the suicide rate by a decade. Facebook founded in 2004. MySpace 2003. Twitter, 2006. Social media certainly has contributed to the suicide rate, but it is not the singular cause of the increase. Remember 2007 was the year the Great Recession began. Millions of families went from prosperity to poverty overnight, lost their homes, their savings. Divorce rates went up as well, as a result. Social media didn't cause this. Corrupt bankers caused this. And that was a HUGE contributing factor to the increase in suicide rates in kids, who had to grow up in the midst of it all.

Americans are more politically divided than ever. We’re currently witnessing levels of social unrest not seen since the ‘60s (pick your century — 1960s or 1860s). And yet - Social media didn't exist in the 1960's or 1860's. They didn't have social media to propel their civil unrest. The difference between then and now is - now it happens instantaneously. Previously they had to take time to plan.


Income inequality has never been higher. Has it been lower? Are you able to point to a time when income inequality was lower, and say "yup - that's because there was no social media"? Or were there other reasons why it was lower (if it ever was lower)?

In Myanmar, military personnel used Facebook to incite genocide against ethnic minorities. That is an actual causation. So point taken on that one item, specifically.

Jeff Orlowski’s new documentary The Social Dilemma ... I haven't seen it, and don't have a Netflix account so I can't see it even if I wanted to, presently.

But there's no doubt in my mind, at all, that social media IS used to manipulate people's thinking. Thing is, so is ALL media. Why do you think there are 400,000 different brands of cereal? Why do you think most of them sell so well? What we call social media manipulation now, we used to call public relations then. Convincing people to your way of thinking, or to buy your product, or to believe your truth, or accept your lies - is EVERYTHING you see on TV that isn't livestreaming. If you aren't watching it happen live, you are being manipulated.

And - even if you ARE watching it live - the camera is manipulating you by making you see it from that very specific perspective, that angle, that lighting, that lens, that text scrolling across the bottom of the screen.

All media is manipulation of some kind or another. Social media has become a much more efficient vehicle for it, because it can be created in an instant and reach hundreds of millions of people at the same time, 24/7.

But no, social media manipulation is nothing new, and no one should be surprised by it. We learned how to manipulate our readers when I was a student of journalism in college, in the 1970's.

[oldtimes]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

Correlation doesn't equal causation, Bucco, you know this.

According to the CDC, the youth suicide rate in this country increased by 56% between 2007 and 2017.
Social media predates the increase of the suicide rate by a decade. Facebook founded in 2004. MySpace 2003. Twitter, 2006. Social media certainly has contributed to the suicide rate, but it is not the singular cause of the increase. Remember 2007 was the year the Great Recession began. Millions of families went from prosperity to poverty overnight, lost their homes, their savings. Divorce rates went up as well, as a result. Social media didn't cause this. Corrupt bankers caused this. And that was a HUGE contributing factor to the increase in suicide rates in kids, who had to grow up in the midst of it all.

Americans are more politically divided than ever. We’re currently witnessing levels of social unrest not seen since the ‘60s (pick your century — 1960s or 1860s). And yet - Social media didn't exist in the 1960's or 1860's. They didn't have social media to propel their civil unrest. The difference between then and now is - now it happens instantaneously. Previously they had to take time to plan.


Income inequality has never been higher. Has it been lower? Are you able to point to a time when income inequality was lower, and say "yup - that's because there was no social media"? Or were there other reasons why it was lower (if it ever was lower)?

In Myanmar, military personnel used Facebook to incite genocide against ethnic minorities. That is an actual causation. So point taken on that one item, specifically.

Jeff Orlowski’s new documentary The Social Dilemma ... I haven't seen it, and don't have a Netflix account so I can't see it even if I wanted to, presently.

But there's no doubt in my mind, at all, that social media IS used to manipulate people's thinking. Thing is, so is ALL media. Why do you think there are 400,000 different brands of cereal? Why do you think most of them sell so well? What we call social media manipulation now, we used to call public relations then. Convincing people to your way of thinking, or to buy your product, or to believe your truth, or accept your lies - is EVERYTHING you see on TV that isn't livestreaming. If you aren't watching it happen live, you are being manipulated.

And - even if you ARE watching it live - the camera is manipulating you by making you see it from that very specific perspective, that angle, that lighting, that lens, that text scrolling across the bottom of the screen.

All media is manipulation of some kind or another. Social media has become a much more efficient vehicle for it, because it can be created in an instant and reach hundreds of millions of people at the same time, 24/7.

But no, social media manipulation is nothing new, and no one should be surprised by it. We learned how to manipulate our readers when I was a student of journalism in college, in the 1970's.

Social media is just much easier to exploit and reaches a much greater audience than ever before.

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

Correlation doesn't equal causation, Bucco, you know this.

According to the CDC, the youth suicide rate in this country increased by 56% between 2007 and 2017.
Social media predates the increase of the suicide rate by a decade. Facebook founded in 2004. MySpace 2003. Twitter, 2006. Social media certainly has contributed to the suicide rate, but it is not the singular cause of the increase. Remember 2007 was the year the Great Recession began. Millions of families went from prosperity to poverty overnight, lost their homes, their savings. Divorce rates went up as well, as a result. Social media didn't cause this. Corrupt bankers caused this. And that was a HUGE contributing factor to the increase in suicide rates in kids, who had to grow up in the midst of it all.

Americans are more politically divided than ever. We’re currently witnessing levels of social unrest not seen since the ‘60s (pick your century — 1960s or 1860s). And yet - Social media didn't exist in the 1960's or 1860's. They didn't have social media to propel their civil unrest. The difference between then and now is - now it happens instantaneously. Previously they had to take time to plan.


Income inequality has never been higher. Has it been lower? Are you able to point to a time when income inequality was lower, and say "yup - that's because there was no social media"? Or were there other reasons why it was lower (if it ever was lower)?

In Myanmar, military personnel used Facebook to incite genocide against ethnic minorities. That is an actual causation. So point taken on that one item, specifically.

Jeff Orlowski’s new documentary The Social Dilemma ... I haven't seen it, and don't have a Netflix account so I can't see it even if I wanted to, presently.

But there's no doubt in my mind, at all, that social media IS used to manipulate people's thinking. Thing is, so is ALL media. Why do you think there are 400,000 different brands of cereal? Why do you think most of them sell so well? What we call social media manipulation now, we used to call public relations then. Convincing people to your way of thinking, or to buy your product, or to believe your truth, or accept your lies - is EVERYTHING you see on TV that isn't livestreaming. If you aren't watching it happen live, you are being manipulated.

And - even if you ARE watching it live - the camera is manipulating you by making you see it from that very specific perspective, that angle, that lighting, that lens, that text scrolling across the bottom of the screen.

All media is manipulation of some kind or another. Social media has become a much more efficient vehicle for it, because it can be created in an instant and reach hundreds of millions of people at the same time, 24/7.

But no, social media manipulation is nothing new, and no one should be surprised by it. We learned how to manipulate our readers when I was a student of journalism in college, in the 1970's.

I agree with some and disagree with others.

Frankly, if it didn't orphan your post, I would delete it. That was an opinion piece that just caught my eye.

However, never have I seen, on this forum and others more people drawn to these platforms....Facebook, YouTube, twitter...what have you for news, and use them to validate whatever, and more sadly vilify the mainstream media as "fake" or lies.

By the way, in reading one of your posts here, made me recall the Commodore 64, and Prodigy. Recall them ? I thought my Commodore 64 could never be equaled 😁

[Bay Kid]

Originally Posted by davem4616

some would say that we are already in a civil war....

sometimes ya gotta name it to claim it

You think? Threats from one side if they don't get what they want we will see riots like never before. Their way or the highway.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by davem4616

some would say that we are already in a civil war....

sometimes ya gotta name it to claim it

I feel like this has the underpinnings of another cold war, using a civil war as a tool. In other words - I think this is much much darker than a civil war.

[Bucco]

From Abraham Lincoln

"We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory ... will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature."

Just saying......and a reminder that this thread was to be about social media !!!!

[Dana1963]

Originally Posted by Bucco

Facebook warned on Monday that it would block users and news organizations in Australia from sharing local and international news stories on its social network and Instagram if the country passed a proposed code of conduct aimed at curbing the power of Facebook and Google.

This from NY Times Australia

Nteresting how the world now works

Best thing to happen for Australia do away with Facebook!

[DeanFL]

.
.
.
Must say I HAVE NOT read the litany of responses on the Thread. I glanced thru, saw some of the "usual suspects' and usual diatribes.

We just saw the Netflix show. In three letters or words = OMG.

First it was extremely well made and the former execs of the various firms were VERY well spoken and each was previously intricately involved in decisions, designing, managing, coding, many of the platforms used in these GIANT firms. Certainly each was very 'well off' after serving in those companies, stocks, etc. So $$$$-wise nothing to lose apparently, but their conscience weighs on them now.

For anyone that has Netflix, I strongly recommend 1.5 hours to watch this, even if you don't use all this Social Media stuff.

They illustrated several quotes re the topics - One was "There are primarily 2 industries that call their customers "Users" - Social Media and Ililicit Drug".

Not totally concerned with us, as we are low-level "Users". Oh - Social Media that is. But our families, the country, and the world...OMG. It has transformed us all since 2010, and we ARE at a very critical point. Apparently our only hope is self-restrictions by all these Social Media firms (HAAHHH!!!) or Government Controls and regulation (almost want to repeat the HAAHHH!). It's all about the power, control, clicks, and primarily making the numbers each quarter. Unfortunately the Government & Social Media Giants have that both in common. Not lookin' good.

...wonderin' if I should post this on my Facebook account? .... nah.....
.
.

[Ladygolfer93]

Originally Posted by Bucco

To those who use social media often, i.e., Facebook, Google, etc. especially those who believe they are not being influenced by whatever platform they use, may I suggest the new documentary on Netflix, titled The Social Dilemma.

It is chilling, and reinforces the fear I have expressed on this site many times. People who work, or did work in the industry reflect on a number of things.

How you are manipulated, and you swear it is impossible. They show vignettes on how one action you make will define what you will see, no matter what you say or do.

Near the end of the documentary, each is asked what the future holds if we do not wake up soon, and the one that got to me was this......after hesitation thecanswer was...."in the short term, civil war"

This was written about the doc....

"Never before in history have 50 designers made decisions that would have an impact on two billion people,” says Tristan Harris, a former design ethicist at Google. Anna Lembke, an addiction expert at Stanford University, explains that these companies exploit the brain’s evolutionary need for interpersonal connection. And Roger McNamee, an early investor in Facebook, delivers a chilling allegation: Russia didn’t hack Facebook; it simply used the platform."

‘The Social Dilemma’ Review: Unplug and Run - The New York Times

Chilling but should be required watching for every person on the planet. If you feel this is much ado about nothing, or overblown, I say...you are wrong.

Please watch as the credits roll and those participating give suggestions.

You are right on the mark. It's an addiction, I used to log in on this platform half a dozen times a year at one time, since I don't do Facebook, since so many activities shut down, I took to logging in most mornings with my coffee (no yoga class ! ). The way people talk to strangers on here is shocking, the nasty replies to people who ask a question, the disrespect for anyone else's opinion or beliefs, or even their religion. I realized this was getting to be a morning "habit" like the coffee and paper used to be. Then add in Alexa, cell phones, twitter, all of it..... I definitely think there is going to be a very steep price to pay.

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by Ladygolfer93

You are right on the mark. It's an addiction, I used to log in on this platform half a dozen times a year at one time, since I don't do Facebook, since so many activities shut down, I took to logging in most mornings with my coffee (no yoga class ! ). The way people talk to strangers on here is shocking, the nasty replies to people who ask a question, the disrespect for anyone else's opinion or beliefs, or even their religion. I realized this was getting to be a morning "habit" like the coffee and paper used to be. Then add in Alexa, cell phones, twitter, all of it..... I definitely think there is going to be a very steep price to pay.

I believe we are paying now.

[Northwoods]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

The media itself (Facebook and twitter) I don't feel have nefarious purposes in any of this. There's no conspiracy backed by Facebook to twist the minds of its members. However, their system works such that we are provided with content that we choose to prefer. So if I like reading things about puppies, the system will provide me with more puppy content to enjoy. If I prefer reading things that are pro-blue, I will be presented with more pro-blue things to read. And within that group of pro-blue things, will be anti-red things. Because pro-blue is not happy with red. They don't get along, the system knows this because the system exists to keep track of that kind of thing.

It's not any person in Facebook that says "hey let's make these people hate each other!" But rather, it's people hating each other, being provided with more ammunition to continue their hatred, because it's simply what floats their boat and the system has no emotional investment in either of them being right or wrong. It knows only that Joe likes Red and doesn't like Blue, and Sue likes Blue and doesn't like Red. It gives them what they want. That is its function.

If you don't want to be influenced by any one or other thing, then don't focus your interest on any one or other thing when you visit these media sites. If you want to very specifically avoid any one or other thing, it's very easy to do, on all of those media sites. You can put up an adblocker, AND on Facebook there's a thing called FBP, which stands for Facebook Purity. It's a very sophisticated totally independent filtering add-on, it's free, it's supported and updated regularly, and it does a great job.

The only political stuff I ever see on Facebook, is political stuff I WANT to see. And I can shut -that- stuff off with a click of the mouse, any time.

I have both conservative and liberal friends on Facebook. I can tell you that I have seen a number of posts from conservative friends that were "blocked" by Facebook (they will not let you click through to the link). I have never seen any posts blocked by my liberal friends (and that includes a liberal friend that wanted our President to die).

I believe that if Facebook feels that a link is "false" that they should add a "bubble" that says there are alternate views of this link. But I don't think they should ever censor or determine what I should see. Isn't that what the first amendment is all about?

[Bucco]

Just received this in an email from a friend in PA.

Perhaps those who cavort on Facebook can validate if it is true.
-----------
There has been an explosion of political disinformation ahead of tonight's debate. This garbage can be traced back to QAnon posts and well-known conspiracy theorists. Yet these lies are spreading like crazy on Facebook right now — and are finding a home with right-wing outlets.