Thus, better to do nothing, as Boz wrote with a rather dramatic flourish, noting with faux-agony that he too was bereft that Facebook helped President Trump achieve victory in 2016. But rather than acknowledge any manipulation of the platform by Russians, Boz argued which is also now the gospel at Facebook that Mr. Trumps success was all due to his campaigns unbelievable work in using digital ad tools like a boss.
Awe and then shock, I guess. As a committed liberal I find myself desperately wanting to pull any lever at my disposal to avoid the same result. So what stays my hand? wrote Boz, as if he were yielding Gandalfs Glamdring sword. I find myself thinking of The Lord of the Rings at this moment specifically, he said, when Frodo offers the ring to Galadriel and she imagines using the power righteously, at first, but knows it will eventually corrupt her. As tempting as it is to use the tools available to us to change the outcome, I am confident we must never do that or we will become what we fear.
Except that what most people fear is a Facebook that continues to take a hands-off approach to a platform that always seems to be running amok somewhere, well beyond whatever microtargeted ads Mr. Trumps brilliant campaign staff runs.
Facebooks lack of significant action to police political ads is in contrast to recent moves by the two other important platforms, which are either outright banning those ads (Twitter) or severely restricting how they are presented (Google). Facebook is the only platform that really counts in this space, so what it has decided is what will be the oxygen of the 2020 race.
There is a fair debate to have on the issue of microtargeting which essentially allows for the slicing and dicing of a message into the tiniest bits, for potentially very narrow groups of users. Some feel microtargeting lets small and more marginalized political voices find their audience in a cost-effective way, since they cannot afford pricier mediums like television ads. Others think that microtargeting allows the powerful to plant millions of lies in the specific ears of the those who are easy to manipulate. Both are true, but by not better policing the practice, Facebook certainly creates an atmosphere of chaos, especially for those interested in more transparent and truthful debate.
Honesty may never be possible, according to Facebook, since the company has opted to keep allowing our elected officials to lie like a rug online. This is an astonishing abrogation of responsibility by the company, although if you have watched it do this same kind buck-passing over the years, it is no surprise.
In a post defending Facebooks policy, Rob Leathern, the director of product management overseeing the advertising integrity division, rehashed the approach to political ads: In the absence of regulation, Facebook and other companies are left to design their own policies. We have based ours on the principle that people should be able to hear from those who wish to lead them, warts and all, and that what they say should be scrutinized and debated in public.
See the rest here:
