Facebook is criticizing journalists and publications for reporting on documents leaked from the company, deeming the headlines emerging as being "coordinated".
Well, as a fellow journalist who has commented on Facebook's so clearly private matters before, I apologies. In fact, perhaps we all should. Perhaps these social network is right. Perhaps this slew of articles, all attacking Facebook's moral and social fiber, are very much a grand conspiracy, coordinated to break the company and its corollary platforms down into dust. That is very, very possible, and for that I apologies. Unless these attacks aren't organized. Unless a previous employee and current whistleblower has very recently demonstrated that the social network profits off of affecting the mental health of its users. Or, worse yet, a series of Congressional hearings, starting from 2020 and continuing to this day, keep circling about the company. Maybe, just maybe, Facebook is being so savagely attacked in the news because it...deserves to be?
Oh my, what an unrealistic take.
At any rate, let us return to a more serious demeanor as we discuss this recent comment passed up by the social network in response to the rather public lambasting its receiving. There's been no end to the public coverage that Facebook's receiving nowadays, thanks in no small part to the recent debate sparked by one Frances Haugen. Ms. Haugen, an ex-employee responsible for monitoring election data at the company, was placed in a perfect position to witness the hate and vitriol social media is capable of. Worse, however, was the fact that she saw Facebook's algorithm actively promoting such vitriol. To make matters worse, Haugen also reported that the social media was responsible for promoting unrealistic and harmful content about body image that led on to cause harm to impressionable youths.
Facebook's been attempting to discredit Ms. Haugen's comments as inaccurate, out of context, and blatant lies. Ignoring, of course, the fact that this ex-employee left the company of her own volition instead of being fired, is going to Congress instead of suing, and therefore has no real motivation to lie. Since then, Facebook even made a laughable attempt at protecting its image by introducing a feeble "take a break" feature on Instagram. The feature will gauge if teenagers are going through potentially triggering content and then, after the content's been viewed, give a pop-up notification gently asking them to stop. It's almost humorous just how reportable Facebook's current streak of legal trouble's going.
The social network can lie, it can accuse print and publications, it can do whatever it wants. The fact of the matter remains that the company faces governmental inquiry regardless. So, that should be fun for us conspiring, scheming, mustache twirling journalists, no?
Photo Illustration by Rafael Henrique/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Image
Read next: WSJ claims when it comes to harmful content removal Facebook's AI tech is not as efficient as the social network may make it seems
Well, as a fellow journalist who has commented on Facebook's so clearly private matters before, I apologies. In fact, perhaps we all should. Perhaps these social network is right. Perhaps this slew of articles, all attacking Facebook's moral and social fiber, are very much a grand conspiracy, coordinated to break the company and its corollary platforms down into dust. That is very, very possible, and for that I apologies. Unless these attacks aren't organized. Unless a previous employee and current whistleblower has very recently demonstrated that the social network profits off of affecting the mental health of its users. Or, worse yet, a series of Congressional hearings, starting from 2020 and continuing to this day, keep circling about the company. Maybe, just maybe, Facebook is being so savagely attacked in the news because it...deserves to be?
Oh my, what an unrealistic take.
At any rate, let us return to a more serious demeanor as we discuss this recent comment passed up by the social network in response to the rather public lambasting its receiving. There's been no end to the public coverage that Facebook's receiving nowadays, thanks in no small part to the recent debate sparked by one Frances Haugen. Ms. Haugen, an ex-employee responsible for monitoring election data at the company, was placed in a perfect position to witness the hate and vitriol social media is capable of. Worse, however, was the fact that she saw Facebook's algorithm actively promoting such vitriol. To make matters worse, Haugen also reported that the social media was responsible for promoting unrealistic and harmful content about body image that led on to cause harm to impressionable youths.
Facebook's been attempting to discredit Ms. Haugen's comments as inaccurate, out of context, and blatant lies. Ignoring, of course, the fact that this ex-employee left the company of her own volition instead of being fired, is going to Congress instead of suing, and therefore has no real motivation to lie. Since then, Facebook even made a laughable attempt at protecting its image by introducing a feeble "take a break" feature on Instagram. The feature will gauge if teenagers are going through potentially triggering content and then, after the content's been viewed, give a pop-up notification gently asking them to stop. It's almost humorous just how reportable Facebook's current streak of legal trouble's going.
The social network can lie, it can accuse print and publications, it can do whatever it wants. The fact of the matter remains that the company faces governmental inquiry regardless. So, that should be fun for us conspiring, scheming, mustache twirling journalists, no?
Photo Illustration by Rafael Henrique/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Image
Read next: WSJ claims when it comes to harmful content removal Facebook's AI tech is not as efficient as the social network may make it seems
