The game is a delicate one, and Mark Zuckerberg is aware of it. Define “insane” the hypothesis that, in some way, Facebook has helped to influence the outcome of the u.s. presidential election is not (been) sufficient. The founder and ceo of the social network from a little less than 1.8 billion users, is back on the topic of bowls (a bit more) still, after the comment to warm of the conference Techonomy: “Of all the content present on Facebook, the 99% is authentic. Only a small amount is composed of fake news and lies. Therefore, it is unlikely that the lies have changed the outcome of this election,” he wrote in the night — Italian — between Saturday and Sunday.
Ready via and in leg on one of the most sensitive aspects of the debate: while admitting that “identify the truth is complicated,” Zuckerberg declares to have “made progress” in the filtering and elimination of false news or of the so-called hoaxes. The commitment in this sense is not actually a novelty, although only three days ago, the vice president of product management Adam Mosseri admitted to TechCrunch that we must “do much more”. The last important modification of the algorithm the sign of the contents verified, and relevant dates back to April.
What has changed in these months? increased pressure, especially in view of the vote on the liability of Menlo Park, in the selection of what is displayed to users. The dismissal of journalists who were Trending, ad hoc section is not present in Italy, in which are displayed articles of the most popular, has turned more spotlights on this problem. And Buzzfeed has shown that 38% of the post of the pages close to the Republican party contains false information. The New York Times confirmed in these hours as the leaders of society are discussing animatedly: “Some employees are worried about the spread of the meme of a racist. Others wonder if the platform has helped to create a filter bubble.”
the position of The young billionaire is getting more … , without forgetting how the declaration of starting of August this year is “we are not a media company”. “We have helped more than 2 million to register to vote, and, according to our estimates, a similar number of people would have otherwise stayed at home. We have helped millions of people to connect with the candidate so you can directly listen to their voice and to be informed in the best way. And, more importantly, we have given tens of millions of people the tools to share the billions of posts and reactions on this election. Much of this debate would not have happened without Facebook,” he wrote.
In this order: puts the emphasis on the technological tools available — and not publishing — offered during electoral campaigns. Back on his choice to not censor the statements of Trump, even if potentially harmful to the standards of current (we talked about it here) and opens to a management of this kind in the name of the public debate (uncovering the Pandora’s box of the deletion of the content). And remember that you have not created a place of discussion of marginal (or alternate), but a context in which you activate a conversation that in any other situation could take place (as confirmed by data from the Pew Research Center).
is responsible for it? No, according to what he writes, why the filter bubble — as he explained to the Italian mathematician Walter Quattrociocchi — is the result of our choices. Not surprisingly, Facebook has released in September a portal that explains in clear and simple way how to shape their News Feed. The role, according to his post, which you feel invested is that of the identification technology of truth and falsehood. A thing, anything, in short.
November 13, 2016 (change on November 13, 2016 | 18:02)
© REPRODUCTION RESERVED
No comments:
Post a Comment