SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the why-wait-until-AFTER-the-election? dept.
Facebook Braces Itself for Trump to Cast Doubt on Election Results:
Facebook spent years preparing to ward off any tampering on its site ahead of November's presidential election. Now the social network is getting ready in case President Trump interferes once the vote is over.
Employees at the Silicon Valley company are laying out contingency plans and walking through postelection scenarios that include attempts by Mr. Trump or his campaign to use the platform to delegitimize the results, people with knowledge of Facebook's plans said.
Facebook is preparing steps to take should Mr. Trump wrongly claim on the site that he won another four-year term, said the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. Facebook is also working through how it might act if Mr. Trump tries to invalidate the results by declaring that the Postal Service lost mail-in ballots or that other groups meddled with the vote, the people said.
Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook's chief executive, and some of his lieutenants have started holding daily meetings about minimizing how the platform can be used to dispute the election, the people said. They have discussed a "kill switch" to shut off political advertising after Election Day since the ads, which Facebook does not police for truthfulness, could be used to spread misinformation, the people said.
The preparations underscore how rising concerns over the integrity of the November election have reached social media companies, whose sites can be used to amplify lies, conspiracy theories and inflammatory messages. YouTube and Twitter have also discussed plans for action if the postelection period becomes complicated, according to disinformation and political researchers who have advised the firms.
[...] The preparations underscore how rising concerns over the integrity of the November election have reached social media companies, whose sites can be used to amplify lies, conspiracy theories and inflammatory messages. YouTube and Twitter have also discussed plans for action if the postelection period becomes complicated, according to disinformation and political researchers who have advised the firms.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 25 2020, @07:01AM (6 children)
Facebook should be shut down.
FTFY
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday August 25 2020, @06:20PM (5 children)
Definitely no unconstitutional suppression of free speech with that plan!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 25 2020, @06:30PM
All of a sudden standing on top of a beer crate yelling, isn't fine enough anymore for free speech.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by VanessaE on Tuesday August 25 2020, @06:30PM (1 child)
It wouldn't be unconstitutional as Facebook isn't a government entity. Private businesses are subject to laws pertaining to dangerous speech (fire, theater) and to discrimination, but NOT to 1A. Of course, that can be either good or bad, depending on your point of view.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday August 26 2020, @01:55AM
They are, if they're acting as proxies for government at any level. I suspect they are, if they receive funding as well from the same governments, just like colleges and universities often are.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by meustrus on Tuesday August 25 2020, @09:30PM
It would be unconstitutional if Trump did it, acting as the president.
It would not be unconstitutional if private citizens decided to boycott the platform, or if the platform itself decided to suspend operations.
None of that is going to happen. Facebook's goal here is ultimately to convince people that it isn't the dumpster fire of psychological manipulation that it truly is. As such, they must carefully balance the power that they provide, for a fee, to psychological manipulators like Trump, against the potential fallout should people on either side decide that the danger is greater than the benefits of remaining on their platform.
None of that has anything to do with law, political bias, or even civic duty. It's all about placating user concerns without substantially curbing the power of their ad partners to influence the way users think, spend, and vote.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2020, @11:37AM
Depends on how you go about it. If you pass strict enough privacy laws, Facebook could be run out of business.