Senior Facebook staffers are concerned about the company’s struggle to keep youngsters engaged after more than a decade of failing to recruit younger users.
According to a whistleblower, when queried by analysts about growth forecasts, Facebook executives often paint a more rosy image than what is shown in internal data. Former Facebook product manager Frances Haugen disclosed numerous conclusions to the US Securities and Exchange Commission, which her legal counsel then gave to Congress in redacted form. These findings include the following.
Bloomberg is one of 17 news organizations in the US that have obtained the congressionally redacted versions. According to the documents, under CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s leadership, Facebook built a Silicon Valley social media behemoth that has racked up spectacular sales and profit increases while simultaneously failing miserably in its objective to empower people with the tools they need to establish community and unite the world.
Of course, the social media giant has a defence. It points to new products and services it’s working on to appeal to a younger audience. It says hate speech makes up a small percentage of the content it hosts and is declining. It also says it uses research, hypothetical tests, and other methods to understand better how it recommends content and reduces its exposure to potentially harmful material.
Aside from this, Facebook claims that the information Haugen provided to the SEC is a “selected selection” that “can in no way be used to draw fair judgments about us.”
It’s still early, but the company’s blunders are starting to cost it money now. Since the Wall Street Journal began publishing stories based on the whistle documents, blower’s Facebook shares have dropped by more than 10%. And politicians, who are already considering measures to limit Facebook’s power, are pressing for even more stringent regulation.
Researchers, as well as current and former Facebook employees, have obtained the following information from papers and other sources:
According to Facebook executives, hate speech on Facebook is far more pervasive and established than the company makes public. However, Facebook focuses on removing violent and hateful content in English-speaking countries in the West while neglecting developing regions that are more sensitive to the real-world harm caused by negativity on social media platforms.
Lack of employees, constraints on product development, and the platform’s engagement-focused algorithm, which often promotes information that might be false and divisive, hampered a Facebook team tasked with stopping the flow of harmful messages.
It has been found that fundamental Facebook tools such as Messenger and News Feed help disseminate harmful content. Political reasons sometimes hinder the corporation’s efforts to combat disinformation.
The fictional user’s account had degraded into a whirlwind of fake news and obscene photographs within three weeks.
On January 6, employees at Facebook, including internal researchers, blamed the corporation for failing to stop the spread of violent groups.
Some of the key points from The Facebook Papers :
Facebook’s identity was cemented by the “Like” button and the sharing functionality. However, according to documents obtained by the New York Times, the corporation is having difficulty dealing with the consequences of these tools, which include magnifying hate speech and spreading false information.
In one of Facebook’s most lucrative Asian regions, Chief Executive Officer Mark Zuckerberg personally decided to comply with the Communist Party’s demands to block anti-government dissidents, the Washington Post reported.
According to The Verge, while the United States, India, and Brazil are given the greatest priority for extra security during elections, other nations receive very little protection until content moderators escalate information to the next level.
According to Politico, the hacked Facebook documents include a wealth of information about Washington’s antitrust battle with the social media giant. The documents reveal that Facebook is well-aware of its market dominance, even if the business has made no public claims to that effect. As a result, the evidence shows that the firm is likely to face increased scrutiny from antitrust regulators and legislators.