I really don't see why Facebook is blamed for this. That ethnic tension was present way before Facebook even existed. It was kept in check by an authoritarian military dictatorship and then bubbled up in the transition to more democracy, which really shouldn't have been unexpected. Facebook was just there at the wrong time, and happened to be the way people were communicating at that time; Aung San Suu Kyi has also gotten a lot of criticism for being in this even though she has been mostly powerless to do anything about it either.
All Facebook can do is stop the propagation on their network. Even with China-level censorship, they would probably need serious manual effort or even a complete network shutdown to stop being a medium. But the same problems will still occur using other channels, maybe the hate won't move as fast, but it will still be fast enough to cause plenty of damage.
Is it hyperbole to say that Facebook helped enable genocide in Myanmar? Or that it has been an incredibly useful tool for political propaganda, more so than traditional media ever was?
They have not done anything to meaningfully address the very real issues their platform has, and are forging ahead regardless to become even more ubiquitous. The negativity is very understandable.
The underlying logic of the reporting blaming Facebook for the Rohingya genocide is that Facebook somehow has more power than a totalitarian, genocidal military dictatorship. Given that assumption it's hard to see why we shouldn't also treat any restrictions they place on speech in the same way as we would a totalitarian government.
Facebook basically fueled a genocide in Myanmar and extreme violence in other places. The whole fake news thing we went through in 2016 was pioneered by Russia to annex Ukraine. Facebook was warned about these behaviors repeatedly by government and watchdog organizations and apparently did nothing to curtail them. So Facebook is this great tool to stay connected to people but at the same time it has been hijacked to cause real harm.
Facebook is even worse in other countries, where they promote outrage algorithmically then don't hire any moderators to even try and keep it in check. This way they're implicated in the genocide of the Rohingya people in Myanmar: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/oct/07/facebooks...
Bingo. So what's wrong with that? Take what happened in Myanmar for example. The government was using Facebook to commit genocide against the Rohingya people. Facebook could have just turned it off in that country. At some point Facebook should just turn itself off. The leaks allege that insiders at Facebook have more or less argued the exact same thing: turn off or greatly tone down profitable features like groups that are routinely misused.
Look up the use of Facebook in the genocide of Rohingya in Myanmar. I see multiple comments in this thread about snowflakes and cancel culture but they miss that social media is a profoundly powerful instigator of race hate and violence.
This is no defence of Facebook's actions here but any suggestion that a hands off approach without policing racial language needs to be conscious of the harm it has already lead to.
In much of South/South-East Asia, for many people, Facebook is the internet. (And remember Facebook Zero? Facebook was aware of and tried to engender this).
A staunch defender of the EITC would claim they were "just" engaging in mercantilism and facilitating the exchange of goods, and the war and deaths were just unfortunate side-effects. Facebook is "just" engaging in connecting people and facilitating the exchange of information, and stoking violence and racial conflict are just unfortunate side-effects.
Yes, this may have happened anyway. Yes, Facebook is not fully responsible. But I disagree with you. The lines are clear.
Facebook de facto became the internet in a country of ~50 million people through subsidising their platform through free data access.
Their platform was developed in order to further their own goals - through maximising engagement and monetisation.
The second order effects of their own personal ambition was enabling people like Wirathu to reach hundreds of thousands of people with hate speech and calls for genocide.
Facebook were informed of this multiple times and allegedly, did nothing about. During this time they had 1 Burmese speaking moderator.
Stating that they have no moral responsibility for the consequences of their actions is in my opinion horseshit. But it does align with certain aspects of the current American zeitgeist of entrepreneurship, free speech and platform "safe harbour" regulations.
This is not a view shared everywhere and should not be assumed when American tech companies scale out of the US. Thankfully this dogmatic approach is being regulated by the likes of the EU and other countries so these platforms are more aligned with their own moral frameworks.
Personally, I find Facebook absolutely morally responsible for parts of this. Just through the simple fact that provided a platform for tens of millions of people - with severely lacking moderation - all in the chase of growth and profits.
This isn't exporting "freedom and democracy" to the world like the good old days. This is abhorrent profit maximisation with no regards for the consequences of their actions, hidden behind a thin veneer of moral rationalization.
This society is full of awful things. It seems strange to me that people single-out Facebook in comparison to whatever other forces exist out there.
I think the single worst thing Facebook was documented as being involved was genocide in Myanmar, which was indeed certainly terrible. And while FB's poor policies are no doubt partly to blame here (obviously, blood on their hands), the people who actually did it, the state that aided etc, are likely more to blame. And similar horrors have been committed in other regions through mass hysteria instead spread through email or text messages (pogroms against strangers in India, etc).
Which is to say that Facebook has many terrible qualities and I'd love people to come together in the kind of social network I want instead, but still, I can't see much or any unique evil in Facebook compared to many systems and processes that it just happens to a part (choose from media, capitalist, elites, whatever).
If Facebook was warned since 2013 that they're a conduit for genocide and give exactly zero fucks unless it becomes a PR problem four years later then, well, I would call them a festering, evil karbunkel of a problem.
Facebook is directly responsible for mass murder (not only in Myanmar, but feel free to look up Sri Lanke, The Philippines, Cambodia and probably a few other countries).
The "Well, Facebook is only a medium and those evil folks could have performed their genocide with the help of postcards" excuse really doesn't cut it.
They knew for years and didn't do shit! Let that sink in...
This is a systemic issue to facebook and it starts with decisions made at the top. The best quote I've heard recently is all massacres start with 'a word'. Because Zuckerberg refused to accept responsibility for the power of word, he allowed the genocide of 7,000 Rohingya including children. The UN reported that Facebook was 'instrumental' in disseminating a message by those who spread hate. The solution is moderators, in every language, with impeccable credentials, and if facebook is still refusing to invest even this much then decentralize the whole damn social media space, because Discord self-moderates, Slack self-moderates, Stackoverflow self-moderates. Because no one wants to be stuck in a room with hateful bigots but Zuck has forced it on you.
I'm not on facebook but it sounds entirely plausible. Facebook conducts psychological experiments[0] to optimise for user engagement so if that anger can make you stay a bit longer and see a few more ads then that's money for them.
Those precious hate dollars have deadly consequences though, especially for Muslims[1][2].
They simply provide a way to communicate between people. When a newspaper incites hatred, we might blame the editor, the writers, or the readers, but we don't blame the paper company.
What I mean is that the service provided by Facebook is somewhat trivial - it can easily be replaced by emails, chats, or any of the countless ways to communicate via the internet. Shutting down Facebook will not solve the problems in Myanmar.
This is just wishful thinking. Facebook is not the root of this problem. People using a medium of communication to incite violence is the problem, Facebook just happens to be the most popular and thus the most effective. History unfortunately shows that other media can just be as effective. The example of the Rwandan genocide already has been given.
Just look at what the facebook algorithm is doing. By optimizing for engagement it is pushing outrage-generating content turning people against each other.
800,000 people in Myanmar have been displaced because they had to flee their country. All driven by the Myanmar military posting false information on facebook.
Facebook's AI doesn't hate Muslims, but it is responsible for at least million refugees.
Now look at what is happening with polarization in countries all around the world. In the USA, Canada, everywhere.
Skynet isn't going to send a bunch of robots to terminate us, it's going to manipulate our media and convince us to terminate each other... and unless something changes skynet is probably facebook.
Facebook is also specifically used in countries to rally violence against ethnic minorities. As in literally assisting genocide. Looking at it with rose colored glasses is missing a lot of the point.
In addition, Arab spring isn’t even a positive example. What have the aftermaths of that been?
You're making excuses. Facebook didn't hire translators even though they were profiting off the genocide. They didn't cut off services. It wasn't just the military but nationalist Buddhists were outing their neighbors, doxxing them as Rohingya, condemning them to death via Facebook.
And for you to suggest that Facebook shouldn't be held responsible for their actions because other tech companies would do the same, is lazy and dishonest. The fact is that the genocide was lead by Facebook, not some other tech company, and I will keep reminding people of this event every time some apologist tries to ignore what happened.
All Facebook can do is stop the propagation on their network. Even with China-level censorship, they would probably need serious manual effort or even a complete network shutdown to stop being a medium. But the same problems will still occur using other channels, maybe the hate won't move as fast, but it will still be fast enough to cause plenty of damage.
reply