Already guilty of manipulating the mood of users, censorship, news feed manipulation and removing content, Berit Anderson of Scout theorises on how just two people working for the social media giant could impact results of the upcoming U.S. elections simply by altering what the news feed would show.
There is no process that we are aware of within Facebook for understanding the political, ideological and societal effects news feed updates might have on users.
That means that, assuming their code is error-free and doesn’t negatively impact privacy, engagement, or business metrics, two employees could collude to manipulate the beliefs and behavior of Facebook’s 1.65 billion users without anyone—users, fellow employees, executive leadership, Mark himself—even noticing.
One reported Facebook employee implied in a 2011 post that Mark Zuckerberg reviews all changes to Newsfeed algorithms. Facebook has yet to confirm or deny that fact to Scout. However, we have it on good account that, though the review has at least existed in the past, it was superficial at best.
Scout also has three scenarios of how this may pan out.
|I was driven mad by the Chinese education system|
|Pirate Browser: Pirate Bay's Browser With Built-in Tools to Bypass Censorship|
|Rise of the Patent Troll|
|Canada threatens WTO complaint over European seal product ban|
|Republicans Against Science|
|“In comparison to the waste produced by every other kind of electricity production, that quantity is close to zero.”|
|“If I’m upset with Facebook, what’s the equivalent product I can go sign up for?”|
|Fake Name Generator|
|Japanese Robot Serves Ice Cream From Inside a Vending Machine|
|The (Very Scary) People of Public Transit|
|Google Map Shows You the Most Photographed Areas of the World|
|What Computers See When They Watch a Movie|
|“A man-powered machine that creates scarfs in 5 minutes.”|
|CaptchaTweet: Write Tweets in Captcha Form|
|“Research that could engineer dinosaurs back into existence within the next five to 10 years.”|
|“The only thing worse than assuming that carbon removal will save the day is assuming it will save the day.”|