Skip to navigationSkip to content
Close
Facebook Busts Shadowy Plot to Jolt Elections

Facebook Busts Shadowy Plot to Jolt Elections

Read more on The New York Times

Contributions

  • Sheryl Sandberg is right that battling disinformation campaigns is a new “arms race”, but Facebook cannot protect us like we can protect ourselves. But that requires full transparency on how our data is captured and used by advertisers and other accounts to target us, which they are still unwilling to

    Sheryl Sandberg is right that battling disinformation campaigns is a new “arms race”, but Facebook cannot protect us like we can protect ourselves. But that requires full transparency on how our data is captured and used by advertisers and other accounts to target us, which they are still unwilling to do. It’s a moral imperative for Facebook to pull down the curtains and show us what’s really going on with our data.

  • The best way to combat this is to use the blue check marks for politicians and their Facebook campaigns. FB already uses this system, they just need to use it for campaigns now.

    For those who don’t know, the blue check mark signifies that a public figure is actually them (or their official PR team)

    The best way to combat this is to use the blue check marks for politicians and their Facebook campaigns. FB already uses this system, they just need to use it for campaigns now.

    For those who don’t know, the blue check mark signifies that a public figure is actually them (or their official PR team). Without that blue check mark you know it’s an impersonator. Because anyone can make a Facebook account and claim to be Taylor Swift for example or Mick Jagger. You can’t actually know it is them without that blue check mark by their name.

  • Why do I not believe that it's just a little less than three dozen pages? Why don't I believe anything that comes out of Facebook? After all, their CEO serruptitiously fawned over Trump following the 2016 election; the same man who took prevarication to never before seen heights when asked before Congress

    Why do I not believe that it's just a little less than three dozen pages? Why don't I believe anything that comes out of Facebook? After all, their CEO serruptitiously fawned over Trump following the 2016 election; the same man who took prevarication to never before seen heights when asked before Congress to explain how a shady, Russian backed company got access to millions of citizens' data and still failed to commit to creating safeguards. This is PR spin. There is more going on here than Facebook will admit.

  • This should be a normal every day part of Facebook's operations and not a major press release / media event. Keep your platform secure and don't allow violations of campaign law or your terms of service. No pat on the back - keep your head down and keep working.

  • Not surprising

  • Sounds like PR more than anything

  • So..... a good portion of this should really be kicked up to an appropriate agency that can pursue the legal ramifications, pressing charges, or at least corroborate evidence and challenge Congress to action. Congress is who most of the comments should be addressed to. They(Congress) should not be allowed

    So..... a good portion of this should really be kicked up to an appropriate agency that can pursue the legal ramifications, pressing charges, or at least corroborate evidence and challenge Congress to action. Congress is who most of the comments should be addressed to. They(Congress) should not be allowed to skate free with barely more than a sound bite and maintaining a high level of collusion by not actively supporting Mueller’s pursuit of the infringement of 2016.

  • Did they specify who? If not, it was liberal election committees.