farcebook

Explain?

Facebook further blurs the difference between objective analysis, expert opinion, and uninformed nonsense. And, yes, like the talk shows, it profits off this amplification of nonsense. Algorithmic engagement is the natural evolution of "if it bleeds, it leads".

Facebook just happens to be much bigger and much better at it than the legacy news companies.

I agree, and that's why I said "rudimentary". Still, as content producers and not algorithmic aggregators, both their ability and success at amplifying disinformation is much, much less than Facebook's. Even Breitbart or DailyKOS's impacts -- as outlets who often and purposefully distort the truth -- are not even rounding errors to Facebook's sheer scale.

One, most of the mainstream news has at least basic editorial processes in place that do a rudimentary check on truthiness. Facebook, along with some of the sketchier news outlets, are the opposite: they profit off (and optimize for) disinformation.

Two, it's a matter of scale. Facebook reaches a far larger audience and has far more detail into their preferences and can nano-target personalized stories for them and corral them into groups, creating perfect echo chambers. The news companies are way too small and in some way irrelevant. Even if they all went bankrupt overnight, Facebook's algorithms will keep working, keep producing personalized truth bubbles. Is fake news a problem in general? Sure. But the news companies are tiny compared to Facebook, and not the immediate and persistent threat to democracy that Facebook is, just because they're much smaller. Even if you take the entirety of local news networks as a whole, they don't have the same saturation and engagement feedback loops that Facebook has.

The Powers That Be are typically reactionary forces, and has long battled the news industry over free speech and censorship etc. Facebook is a relatively new villain, different than the old ones, and way more powerful. Further regulating the news industry won't really deal the Facebook issue since they can keep on aggregating from anywhere and everywhere. It's a different beast altogether.

So, what, we should just wait until Zuckerberg decides to get his act together one day and admit he's been a wee bit evil?

The whole point of whistleblowing is so the average worker cna tattle on the unethical decisions made by leadership. The C-suite isn't going to volunteer for the guillotine.