12 thoughts on “The Internet’s Feet of Clay: Google and Facebook Deceive”
The issue of internet privacy was already out of control; I think the tailored content search is a far more insidious evil, and I don’t buy the ridiculous suggestion that it’s about giving me a “more satisfying internet experience.” In fact, it’s had the opposite effect on me for some time already.
It’s become increasingly difficult to access new or valuable content, as I am continually steered toward the same old same old. Now I understand why the more I search, the more my results seem to turn up less, rather than more. The opposite used to be true.
It can now take me hours, even days, to find the kind of solid or new information I used to find in a matter of minutes, and I know it’s not because there’s so much more out there but because I’m being denied access. It can be a real exercise in madness. Often I give up altogether, longing nostalgically for a good local library (sadly, also not possible where I live).
I don’t need anyone – or anything – “suggesting” what I might want to read if it means denying me access to everything else. Censorship isn’t around the corner, it is here.
we’ve reported on this issue a couple times before, including posting links to NPR & Democracy Now interviews with Pariser when he was plugging his book, but it does not hurt to be reminded of how these things are actually working.
and maria, yes — thanks for bringing your pov into the mix. important to be reminded of these things.
It’s kind of ironic that I used to Google to discover this, but TED speaker Eli Pariser is the former Executive Director of MoveOn.org and author of THE FILTER BUBBLE: WHAT THE INTERNET IS HIDING FROM YOU.
I was aware that algorithms are being increasingly used on the net but had not realized their use had become so widespread. Thanks for posting…
Thank you Eric! I was seeing something weird happening on FB with the new upgrade. I had a gut feeling and chose to follow it, and I deleted my profile. Seeing this just made me see things ever clearer.
Thanks,
HS
Brendan, thanks. I do my best, and truly I never expected the “information marketplace” to become the absolute trivia bric-a-brac sale that it’s become.
I noticed the custom results issue trying to track the ranking of Planet Waves in Google. If I was logged in I got a custom result. If I was not logged in, I got a more honest result, i.e., not accentuating Planet Waves because that’s what I want to see.
Tell me how many people don’t know that their website is not really coming up at the top of Google, it just looks like it is because they frequent their own website.
Maria, great description of the reality of what happened in newsrooms, in the olden days of noble knights and the Wa Po editing team that took on Watergate. Truth is, Watergate was ignored right up until the end. It could have just as easily blown over, except for a few brave souls who took the story national.
This concept brings new meaning to the short-but-loaded phrase “net neutrality.” I’d heard of his results some time ago, and it was nice to hear and see him outline it all.
Along Maria’s lines, it is indeed appalling to see and hear what has happened to journalism over the last twenty years. My hat, such as it is, is off to those who remain true to their training and experience (that’s you EFC!) in these awkward and confusing times.
So much to report, so little altruism…
Echo chamber. You have to make an effort to open your world, was ever thus. We used to be sequestered in neighborhoods, away from people Not Our Kind, Dear.
What killed the human editors was: the right and left sold the notion (using all kinds of evil tools including anti-Semitism) that The Media was full of powerful people conspiring to lie, when the truth is most of them were editors trying to get the best factual stories they could. People trying to get a balance on the opinion page, too. Editors tried to please both the moneyed publishers by putting in stories that would appeal to the golfers, while at the same time slipping in whatever they could to stick it to the man in the name of getting a decent story. Editors could often protect reporters who made trouble or stirred things up. Not perfect, but better than a machine. But the right and left said “never trust The Media!” and hung the wrong people.
Media companies went public, and the shareholders (many of whom are US, because retirements went into a 401k open-market economy) complained that they weren’t getting double-digit profits. Media companies were squeezed, and the editors started getting laid off, and the reporters too — anyone who made trouble was on the hit list, because there was no longer that cushion that allowed for a little trouble now and then. Celebrity news, etc., was safe, right? And it paid off bigger than stories about poor people.
This hits a sore spot for me, because I have been watching smart, caring, ethical, critically thinking, extremely hardworking people get reamed and lose their jobs for 20 years now. People who have put their own jobs on the line to get stories that really changed things into the paper. So now a young man gives a TED talk about how we need our editors. Hmm. Two of the best ones I know are dead, sorry.
Not to presume, but I think by “good intentions” Len meant the impulse to throw out the gatekeepers. Actually, I would prefer a wide open independent media, pretty much everyone for themselves–but that puts too many people in danger. Independent journalists now risk too much, from ridicule and inability to get any other job to getting sued to getting killed, and for what?
Don’t have an answer, but every time I hear someone say “the media always lies” I have to correct it. The media are people, and not all of these people are sleeping slugs or in it for the money (hah) or on the take or part of a conspiracy. An awful lot of them are people who want to afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted, but boomer shareholders hot for early retirement laid them off because they cost too much.
Don’t use ’em.
scroogle dot org
no ads, no cookies
ahhh
smells like leading to censorship. as a consequence anyway.
peace.
Good intentions? They have one intention – profits. We can call it good…
Thanks Eric. I “wondered” about this, so am very glad to hear this talk.
Must find alternatives and utilize them……(esp google)
Eric,
Thank you for posting this eye-opener, a real public service. We know how this tailored content starts, but we must consider how far it will go and where it leads. Good intentions on the part of Face and Goggles (perhaps) leading to unforeseen consequences? Or does the corporate sales pitch sound a bit less than genuine? Time for alternatives again.
The issue of internet privacy was already out of control; I think the tailored content search is a far more insidious evil, and I don’t buy the ridiculous suggestion that it’s about giving me a “more satisfying internet experience.” In fact, it’s had the opposite effect on me for some time already.
It’s become increasingly difficult to access new or valuable content, as I am continually steered toward the same old same old. Now I understand why the more I search, the more my results seem to turn up less, rather than more. The opposite used to be true.
It can now take me hours, even days, to find the kind of solid or new information I used to find in a matter of minutes, and I know it’s not because there’s so much more out there but because I’m being denied access. It can be a real exercise in madness. Often I give up altogether, longing nostalgically for a good local library (sadly, also not possible where I live).
I don’t need anyone – or anything – “suggesting” what I might want to read if it means denying me access to everything else. Censorship isn’t around the corner, it is here.
we’ve reported on this issue a couple times before, including posting links to NPR & Democracy Now interviews with Pariser when he was plugging his book, but it does not hurt to be reminded of how these things are actually working.
and maria, yes — thanks for bringing your pov into the mix. important to be reminded of these things.
It’s kind of ironic that I used to Google to discover this, but TED speaker Eli Pariser is the former Executive Director of MoveOn.org and author of THE FILTER BUBBLE: WHAT THE INTERNET IS HIDING FROM YOU.
I was aware that algorithms are being increasingly used on the net but had not realized their use had become so widespread. Thanks for posting…
Thank you Eric! I was seeing something weird happening on FB with the new upgrade. I had a gut feeling and chose to follow it, and I deleted my profile. Seeing this just made me see things ever clearer.
Thanks,
HS
Brendan, thanks. I do my best, and truly I never expected the “information marketplace” to become the absolute trivia bric-a-brac sale that it’s become.
I noticed the custom results issue trying to track the ranking of Planet Waves in Google. If I was logged in I got a custom result. If I was not logged in, I got a more honest result, i.e., not accentuating Planet Waves because that’s what I want to see.
Tell me how many people don’t know that their website is not really coming up at the top of Google, it just looks like it is because they frequent their own website.
Maria, great description of the reality of what happened in newsrooms, in the olden days of noble knights and the Wa Po editing team that took on Watergate. Truth is, Watergate was ignored right up until the end. It could have just as easily blown over, except for a few brave souls who took the story national.
This concept brings new meaning to the short-but-loaded phrase “net neutrality.” I’d heard of his results some time ago, and it was nice to hear and see him outline it all.
Along Maria’s lines, it is indeed appalling to see and hear what has happened to journalism over the last twenty years. My hat, such as it is, is off to those who remain true to their training and experience (that’s you EFC!) in these awkward and confusing times.
So much to report, so little altruism…
Echo chamber. You have to make an effort to open your world, was ever thus. We used to be sequestered in neighborhoods, away from people Not Our Kind, Dear.
What killed the human editors was: the right and left sold the notion (using all kinds of evil tools including anti-Semitism) that The Media was full of powerful people conspiring to lie, when the truth is most of them were editors trying to get the best factual stories they could. People trying to get a balance on the opinion page, too. Editors tried to please both the moneyed publishers by putting in stories that would appeal to the golfers, while at the same time slipping in whatever they could to stick it to the man in the name of getting a decent story. Editors could often protect reporters who made trouble or stirred things up. Not perfect, but better than a machine. But the right and left said “never trust The Media!” and hung the wrong people.
Media companies went public, and the shareholders (many of whom are US, because retirements went into a 401k open-market economy) complained that they weren’t getting double-digit profits. Media companies were squeezed, and the editors started getting laid off, and the reporters too — anyone who made trouble was on the hit list, because there was no longer that cushion that allowed for a little trouble now and then. Celebrity news, etc., was safe, right? And it paid off bigger than stories about poor people.
This hits a sore spot for me, because I have been watching smart, caring, ethical, critically thinking, extremely hardworking people get reamed and lose their jobs for 20 years now. People who have put their own jobs on the line to get stories that really changed things into the paper. So now a young man gives a TED talk about how we need our editors. Hmm. Two of the best ones I know are dead, sorry.
Not to presume, but I think by “good intentions” Len meant the impulse to throw out the gatekeepers. Actually, I would prefer a wide open independent media, pretty much everyone for themselves–but that puts too many people in danger. Independent journalists now risk too much, from ridicule and inability to get any other job to getting sued to getting killed, and for what?
Don’t have an answer, but every time I hear someone say “the media always lies” I have to correct it. The media are people, and not all of these people are sleeping slugs or in it for the money (hah) or on the take or part of a conspiracy. An awful lot of them are people who want to afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted, but boomer shareholders hot for early retirement laid them off because they cost too much.
Don’t use ’em.
scroogle dot org
no ads, no cookies
ahhh
smells like leading to censorship. as a consequence anyway.
peace.
Good intentions? They have one intention – profits. We can call it good…
Thanks Eric. I “wondered” about this, so am very glad to hear this talk.
Must find alternatives and utilize them……(esp google)
Eric,
Thank you for posting this eye-opener, a real public service. We know how this tailored content starts, but we must consider how far it will go and where it leads. Good intentions on the part of Face and Goggles (perhaps) leading to unforeseen consequences? Or does the corporate sales pitch sound a bit less than genuine? Time for alternatives again.