At the heart of Facebook Inc (NASDAQ:FB) is a simple feedback loop based on the idea that if you like something, you should get more of it. But, this can easily become a rabbit hole, putting only extreme versions of what you like in front of you, radicalizing you in any direction you like.
In response to terror attacks, Facebook constantly repeats that it wants to be hostile to terror, but any view can become terroristic if you believe in it fervently. Portland, Oregon is discovering this, as dedicated followers of President Trump, spurred on by Facebook posts, have wound up in violent clashes against people stirred by Facebook to oppose them.
This is an existential issue threatening not only the financial health of Facebook and the FB stock price but, ultimately, the peace of the world as well. It’s because the issue threatens FB financially that its response has, so far, been mainly word salad.
Who Is a Terrorist?
This became clear over the weekend when British Prime Minister Theresa May threatened to “regulate cyberspace” against “terrorist planning.” Conservatives who would normally be her allies quickly lashed out, fearful that she would move against alt-right groups, not just Islamist ones, against their friends and not just their enemies.
May’s own dilemma was there in the speech, declaring that the “pluralistic values” she champions must be established as “superior” to other value sets. As Tom Lehrer said a half-century ago, “I know there are people who do not love their fellow man and I hate people like that.”
The problem with removing terrorist content is defining who is a terrorist. Is the al-Jazeera news service terrorist? Qatar’s Arab neighbors believe it is. Is the Saudi war in Yemen terrorist? A UNICEF post on Facebook might lead you to believe it is.
The feedback loop can even extend to puppies. Animal rights groups are thought extreme by some people. If your Facebook feed is filled with posts from animal rights activists, are you a terrorist?
There Is No Referee
Over the course of the 20th century, journalists learned to think of themselves as referees in public discourse. This is the role Facebook and other Internet firms are now being told to play.
But, this role runs counter to the way FB operates. It requires Facebook to, in effect, put Fox News in front of liberals, MSNBC in front of conservatives, to put Islam in front of Christians and Christianity in front of Islamists.
Telling people what they don’t want to hear is what journalists do. If you’re a Facebook bull, with a big position in FB stock, and some writer at InvestorPlace tells you the heart of Facebook’s business model may be a poison that is threatening to destroy the world, you may believe the writer just “hates” Facebook, rather than consider the argument.
This is true for every subject under the Sun. In the case of global warming, it’s even true for the Sun. Facebook is in the journalism business. It is the journalism business. Yet, it pretends that it’s not, that it’s just a service in the business of making friends.
There are no easy answers here. Walter Cronkite is not walking through that door. No one, not even Facebook, has the power to make people read or watch what they don’t want to read or watch. Without a referee, however, any game quickly descends into chaos.
It’s time for Mark Zuckerberg to earn that honorary degree.
Dana Blankenhorn is a financial and technology journalist. He is the author of the historical mystery romance The Reluctant Detective Travels in Time, available now at the Amazon Kindle store. Write him at danablankenhorn@gmail.com or follow him on Twitter at @danablankenhorn. As of this writing, he owned shares in FB.
