Chronotope’s Twitter Archive

…in reply to @robleathern
robleathern slpng_giants profcarroll cwarzel That has nothing to do with my argument. My argument is the methodology of Facebook's advertising tools, for targeting and for presenting, leverage it's dominant position as gateway to the internet to make it unavoidable and then give tools for an unethical detail of targeting...
Permalink On twitter.com ❤️ 3 Favorites 2019 Nov 22 Mood -2 🙁

…in reply to @Chronotope
robleathern slpng_giants profcarroll cwarzel Also the presentation of ads within the platform increases their effectiveness, their 'nativeness' in-stream is exactly the type of unethical behavior noted in nngroup.com/articles/banner-blindness-original-eyetracking/ ...
Permalink On twitter.com ❤️ 1 Favorite 2019 Nov 22 Mood 0

…in reply to @Chronotope
robleathern slpng_giants profcarroll cwarzel And we *know* that the level of detailed targeting creates incentives for bad behavior because we've seen that bad behavior in the last election - npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2016/11/23/503146770/npr-finds-the-head-of-a-covert-fake-news-operation-in-the-suburbs And we know it amplifies and advantages bad actors and doesn't create the level playing field you imply here
On twitter.com ♻️ 1 Retweets 2019 Nov 22 Mood -7 🙁

…in reply to @Chronotope
robleathern slpng_giants profcarroll cwarzel The point isn't if the tools are effective. The point is if they can be controlled to assure the safety of users. Thus far the answer has been no.
Permalink On twitter.com ♻️ 2 Retweets ❤️ 3 Favorites 2019 Nov 22 Mood +2 🙂

…in reply to @Chronotope
robleathern slpng_giants profcarroll cwarzel That means that there is some responsibility on Facebook to dial back the mechanisms or start turning them off. Not to its shareholders, but to the public.
Permalink On twitter.com ❤️ 3 Favorites 2019 Nov 22 Mood +1 🙂

Chronotope’s Twitter Archive—№ 113,319