Rein in Facebook, and rein in extremism
Revelations that Facebook profited from divisive speech should come as no surprise to anyone who has followed discussions in groups covering the south and southwest suburbs in recent years.
From Homer Glen to Glenwood and Palos Park to University Park, the social network seemed to encourage discussions that would rile people up. We now know from a trove of company documents that promoting discord was a deliberate strategy.
“I’m here today because I believe Facebook’s products harm children, stoke division and weaken our democracy,” whistleblower Frances Haugen testified before Congress on Oct. 5.
Haugen formerly worked as a data scientist for the company. She told “60 Minutes” she asked to work in an area that fights misinformation because she lost a friend to online conspiracy theories.
“Facebook, over and over again, has shown it chooses profit over safety,” she said.
Zuckerberg pushed back Monday during an earnings call with investors and media.
“My view is what we are seeing is a coordinated effort to selectively use leaked documents to paint a false picture of our company,” he said.
A consortium of 17 news organizations is reporting on tens of thousands of pages of internal documents. The effort, known as the Facebook Papers, revealed company leaders knew inflammatory content was more likely to engage users.
One document, Carol’s Journey to QAnon, described how a company researcher created a fictitious account in 2019 to test Facebook’s algorithms. “Carol” was a conservative mom, a mainstream suburbanite.
Within five days of joining Facebook, group suggestions pushed her down a rabbit hole of conspiracy theories, according to reporting about company documents. The Facebook Papers revealed the company’s algorithms encouraged her to join groups filled with extreme, graphic content.
This news should hardly shock users from south Cook and eastern Will counties. People in Oak Lawn, Orland Park, Tinley Park and other Southland communities are
just like people everywhere else around the world. Material that shocks is more likely to attract attention.
Many were drawn to Facebook’s lure of connecting with family and friends. At first they may have shared memories and laughed together over videos of cats. For many, the social network soon became a source of news and information. This often included opinions, misinformation and sometimes led to more sinister content.
The evolution was surprisingly quick yet gradual enough to escape detection. Users often gave little thought as to whether information was true before sharing it. Many experienced awkward exchanges with relatives, neighbors and friends over the years. User efforts to control the spread of misinformation often spun into arguments. Before long, many were convinced those who held opposing views were evil enemies.
Everything seemed politicized, and extremism seemed normalized. Such sentiment is manifested to this day in vulgar and profane demonstrations of political views, in real life as well as online. Civility has eroded. What will it take to restore decorum?
In the dehumanized environment of online chatter, it was easier to hurl insults, spread lies and use derogatory language. Battle lines were drawn in the months leading up to the 2016 presidential election.
After that election, we learned about Cambridge Analytica and Facebook’s awesome power to manipulate users with targeted advertising. Bad actors bought personal data to exploit user psychology and influence attitudes.
“Anger and hate is the easiest way to grow on Facebook,” Haugen testified Monday to British lawmakers. “We are literally subsidizing hate on these platforms. It is substantially cheaper to run an angry hateful divisive ad than it is to run a compassionate, empathetic ad.”
The Facebook Papers describe instances of how Facebook profited from stoking division around the globe. In Europe, the United States and elsewhere, regulators are considering new rules to potentially limit some of the alleged harms caused by Facebook.
Congress, the Securities and Exchange Commission and others will study testimony and documents to develop policies and possibly new laws. Some compare Facebook’s current moment to Big Tobacco’s undoing. Cigarette companies knew their products killed customers but they kept marketing them to children until laws were changed.
“Facebook and Big Tech are facing a Big Tobacco moment, a moment of reckoning,’’ Connecticut Sen. Richard Blumenthal said this month at the start of a Senate subcommittee hearing examining Facebook’s negative impact on young people. Blumenthal sued tobacco companies in the 1990s when he was attorney general.
Zuckerberg has become one of the world’s wealthiest people since launching Facebook in 2004. Recent company turmoil dropped Zuckerberg’s personal wealth to $121.6 billion, however, and he fell behind Bill Gates to No. 5 on the list of wealthiest people, Bloomberg reported this month.
With great power comes great responsibility. Facebook’s products were used to commit genocide in Myanmar, the company admitted in 2018. Zuckerberg bowed to pressure and censored government critics in Vietnam, according to the Facebook Papers. Documents raise fresh concerns about the company’s role in hate and violence in India and elsewhere.
The explosive revelations of the Facebook Papers should compel Congress to take action. Social media companies should allow users to exercise their First Amendment rights to free speech. But there should be consequences for amplifying divisive messages for the sake of profits.
“Clearly Facebook is unable to police itself,” Blumenthal said Sunday on CNN.
Facebook’s situation reminds me of the parable of two wolves. In the tale, a grandfather tells his grandson there is a fight in everyone between two wolves. One wolf represents anger, hate and evil. The other represents love, kindness and good.
“Which one wins?” the grandson asks.
“The one you feed,” the grandfather says.