The company made news articles posted by users' friends appear higher up in the stream of status updates and articles that display when users first log onto the site, to see if the stories shared by friends before an election would convince them to vote.
Facebook shared the information with academics but did not publicly disclose their experiment until Mother Jones revealed research the academics intend to publish.
“Voting is a core value of democracy and we believe that encouraging civic participation is an important contribution we can make to the community," a Facebook spokesman said.Well, look at you. Your sanctimony shines right through.
Facebook also encourages its members to vote by including a clickable button that reads, "I'm a voter" or "I'm voting." According to their findings the buttons increased turnout by 340,000 additional votes.
I wonder if it ever occurs to these get out vote enthusiasts that the vote they get out might not be the vote they're looking for, and that inducing easily manipulated lazy or indifferent voters to act might not be the best idea.
To register your disapproval at the article on Huffington Post you must first sign up to Facebook to comment.
To read the comments to the article on Huffington Post, I must first turn off "do not track me" Safari extension. Half the commenters are fine with it, showing over half Facebook users are on the short side of the IQ bell curve or else none of the commenters would tolerate it.
So just shut up. Or they will experiment upon you, one way or another, use you, sell your personal information and opinions. There is no advantage to giving these people power and zero opportunity to make money off you. They're all short a few semesters of business ethics.
6 comments:
The Facebook feed is weird to begin with. Every time I'd log in the arrangement would change. Items would disappear then reappear days later. It was maddeningly inconsistent. I'd shut off all the updates to the games all my relatives are playing, then log in again, and there they all are again. I could not get Facebook to accept that I flatly don't care what games people are playing nor how far they've advanced. It's completely vapid and ridiculous.
I don't use "facebook". I don't wish to give Zuckerprick one extra cent.
Sorry.
It might have been the first episode of Mad Men where Don Draper shows genuine empathy and kindness when he engages a downtrodden waiter on a personal level to get ideas on how to sell cigarettes.
Later on, Draper takes a report and recommendation prepared by a haughty, cold, analytic market researcher/psychologist and puts it in the trash, unread, with her standing right there.
Seems heroic.
That Don Draper is part of the problem needs to be strictly understood or nothing wonderful will come from the tale that they are about to relate.
Just say no to facebook.
I don't use Facebook because like rcocean, I don't want to give Zukerprick (I like that term) any support. I also don't want a bunch of intrusive people interfering in my life and contacting me. I don't do it IRL...Why should I on the internet?
I do wish that I could use Facebook, though, because I would like to keep more up on my daughter's Facebook posts and photos.
What DBQ said. Sometimes I'm tempted because family uses it extensively, even for party announcements. With 36 first cousins I can see the benefits, but still I resist.
Post a Comment