“Any attempt by a social media to censor or manipulate the political discussion is a breach of trust and is not in line with the values of an open web”. Thus begins the letter that John Thune, President of the Commission Commerce, Science and Transportation of the US government, sent to Mark Zuckerberg to invite the Facebook to clarify the position of social networks about the alleged censorship of information concerning American conservatives.
to understand where does the heavy accusation must take a step back recovering an article site Use Gizmodo , in which a anonymous former employee of Facebook said that certain news stories and should not be mentioned in the company Trending biancoblu. Not yet available in Italy, this section, which is located in the top right corner of the screen, suggesting users the most discussed news and viral in the platform. The question raised, then, refers to the fact that this selection took place (happens or will happen, who knows) voluntarily and according to specific objectives.
The action of the algorithm capable of identifying alone stories most interesting is just one part of the system, behind which acts a group of curators – important detail, are not direct employees of Facebook but fresh young journalists degree, from the Ivy League and the most prestigious universities on the East Coast – free to the it seems to choose the most interesting content considered, but forced to move from the upper floors in case of themes and characters related to the US right.
This is at least as stated by the deep gorge quoted from the site that launched the ‘ warning: “the arguments could be censored or inserted between the trends depending on who was on duty,” said the source, claiming that, as every newsroom where you are fishing from the informative magma news of greater impact, even in rooms in Menlo Park the selection took place (it comes from the period between mid-2014 and the end of 2015, that is the first life cycle of the Trending section) based on the preferences and interests of journalists-robot purposes (as they are defined themselves for many consecutive hours of work they had to perform). Mode that was enriched with another pass when the center of the story was the same Facebook ( “First, do we?” Was the question that the editor complained to the duty manager), or characters like Mitt Romney and Rand Paul , or issues such as the annual conference of conservatives CPAC . In the latter cases, according to deep throat snapped automatic stop, identical procedure for popular stories cited by Republicans as average Newsmax and Washington Examiner , unless they were not taken up by the big names such as New York Times and CNN .
Given that other editors surveyed by Gizmodo confirmed that unpopular news ended sometimes in out group ( issues such as the war in Syria, little discussed but important geopolitically), but in essence they refuted the crusade anti-Republican deep throat (which, side note, is a staunch conservative). however the story instills doubt about the behavior of Facebook, because algorithm or not any of us can really know how to assess the social and select viral defined themes and highlighted so within Trending.
L ‘ alarm raised recently by Donald Trump , described by Zuckerberg as the enemy (without ever naming him) that want to build walls, while Facebook wants to shoot them down to unite the different populations, threw more water on the fire, forcing the social network to run for cover: “We take very seriously these statements because Facebook is a platform for all political perspectives,” said Tom Stocky, responsible for Trending and vice president of the company, which added as “the guidelines are strict and do not allow the suppression of political views and even to favor one point of view over another. “
Extending the analysis framework socio-political horizon, and while inserting in the context of belief (as those expressed by Zuckerberg, who recently rallied with other big Silicon Valley for a meeting whose theme was the rise of Donald Trump), should be kept in mind some of the cornerstones passing over everything and everyone. Facebook is no longer a social network , or rather not only, because it is a company with a turnover of nine zeros must therefore look first and foremost to defend its interests. Staging duels against a political party or even the next president candidate is a pitfall too dangerous, and it is therefore normal to remain calm and in the middle of the ford. Not surprisingly, during the last presidential campaign of 2012 Facebook has supported both candidates, with a slightly higher outlay in favor of the Republicans ($ 140,000 versus 128,000). Certainly, though, it is that it will be interesting to see how Zuckerberg will respond by May 24 to questions of the Commission headed by John Thune about the Trending operation; because then, regardless of the money that buys almost everything, the United States remains one of the only country in the world where even the big boss of a tank like Facebook can be put under pressure.
No comments:
Post a Comment