Het
hieronder opgenomen artikel, geschreven door Julia Angwin, met hulp
van Madeleine Varner en Ariana Tobin, werd op 14 september 2017
gepubliceerd op Pro Publica.
In dit
artikel wordt aangegeven dat Facebook in 2017 advertenties goedkeurde
die waren gericht op neonazi’s. Vergelijk dat eens met het Facebook
censuurprogramma waar men alternatieve media die de leugens
doorprikken van de reguliere (massa-) media weert van haar platform, waarbij alternatieve nieuwssites, vredesactivisten en hun Facebook accounts,
milieuactivistische accounts en links politieke accounts meer en meer worden geblokkeerd of zelfs geheel worden verwijderd……
Na
Charlottesville, waar een anti-nazi betoger werd vermoord door een
neo-nazi, stelde Zuckerberg (baas Facebook) dat er geen plaats is
voor haatzaaierij op Facebook……
Bij het
aanbieden van advertenties kijkt Facebook of er genoeg lezers zijn,
daarbij kan je zelf ook groepen aandragen en vreemd genoeg werden
antisemitische groepen als potentiële lezers aangemerkt…..
Jammer
dat de schrijvers weer beginnen over de $100,000 aan advertenties die
later aan Rusland werden toegeschreven, alsof die het verschil
maakten tijdens de VS presidentsverkiezingen van 2016….. (ach, het is dan ook een artikel van een paar jaar terug) Het
werkelijke aantal advertenties die mensen echt manipuleerden om voor
de één dan wel de ander te kiezen, was veel groter, zelfs zo groot
dat de $100,000 voor advertenties in het niet vallen, of die nu wel of niet door de
Russische overheid werden betaald…….
Het is
nu al zo zot, dat Facebook onlangs bekend maakte dat leugens in
advertenties van de Republikeinen of Democraten worden
toegestaan…… Terwijl Facebook stelt geen fake news meer te
brengen…… (>> knettergek!!)
Lees het
weliswaar gedateerde, maar wat betreft het huidige Facebook nog
steeds ter zake doende artikel van ProPublica en verbaas je over deze
onverkwikkelijke Facebook-zaak en het meer dan belachelijke beleid
dat Facebook nog steeds voert en zoals je kon lezen in feite zelfs heeft opgevoerd:
Facebook
Enabled Advertisers to Reach ‘Jew Haters:
After
being contacted by ProPublica, Facebook removed several anti-Semitic
ad categories and promised to improve monitoring.
by Julia
Angwin, Madeleine
Varner and Ariana
Tobin
Sept. 14, 2017, 4 p.m. EDT
Tobias
Schwarz/AFP/Getty Images
Want
to market Nazi memorabilia, or recruit marchers for a far-right
rally? Facebook’s self-service ad-buying platform had the right
audience for you.
Until
this week, when we asked Facebook about it, the world’s largest
social network enabled advertisers to direct their pitches to the
news feeds of almost 2,300 people who expressed interest in the
topics of “Jew hater,” “How to burn jews,” or, “History of
‘why jews ruin the world.’”
To
test if these ad categories were real, we paid $30 to target those
groups with three “promoted posts” — in which a ProPublica
article or post was displayed in their news feeds. Facebook approved
all three ads within 15 minutes.
After
we contacted Facebook, it removed the anti-Semitic categories —
which were created by an algorithm rather than by people — and said
it would explore ways to fix the problem, such as limiting the number
of categories available or scrutinizing them before they are
displayed to buyers.
“There
are times where content is surfaced on our platform that violates our
standards,” said Rob Leathern, product management director at
Facebook.
“In
this case, we’ve removed the associated targeting fields in
question. We know we have more work to do, so we’re also building
new guardrails in our product and review processes to prevent other
issues like this from happening in the future.”
Facebook’s
advertising has become a focus of national attention since it
disclosed last week that it had discovered $100,000 worth of ads
placed during the 2016 presidential election season by “inauthentic”
accounts that appeared to be affiliated with Russia.
Like
many tech companies, Facebook has long taken a hands off approach to
its advertising business. Unlike traditional media companies that
select the audiences they offer advertisers, Facebook generates its
ad categories automatically based both on what users explicitly share
with Facebook and what they implicitly convey through their online
activity.
Traditionally,
tech companies have contended that it’s not their role to censor
the Internet or to discourage legitimate political expression. In the
wake of the violent protests in Charlottesville by right-wing groups
that included self-described Nazis, Facebook and other tech companies
vowed to strengthen their monitoring of hate speech.
Facebook
CEO Mark Zuckerberg wrote at
the time that “there is no place for hate in our community,” and
pledged to keep a closer eye on hateful posts and threats of violence
on Facebook. “It’s a disgrace that we still need to say that
neo-Nazis and white supremacists are wrong — as if this is somehow
not obvious,” he wrote.
But
Facebook apparently did not intensify its scrutiny of its ad buying
platform. In all likelihood, the ad categories that we spotted were
automatically generated because people had listed those anti-Semitic
themes on their Facebook profiles as an interest, an employer or a
“field of study.” Facebook’s algorithm automatically transforms
people’s declared interests into advertising categories.
Here
is a screenshot of our ad buying process on the company’s advertising
portal:
This
is not the first controversy over Facebook’s ad categories. Last
year, ProPublica was able
to block an ad that
we bought in Facebook’s housing categories from being shown to
African-Americans, Hispanics and Asian-Americans, raising the
question of whether such ad targeting violated laws against
discrimination in housing advertising. After ProPublica’s article
appeared, Facebook built a system that it said would prevent
such ads from being approved.
Last
year, ProPublica also collected a list of the advertising categories
Facebook was providing to advertisers. We downloaded more
than 29,000 ad categories from
Facebook’s ad system — and found categories ranging from an
interest in “Hungarian sausages” to “People in households that
have an estimated household income of between $100K and $125K.”
At
that time, we did not find any anti-Semitic categories, but we do not
know if we captured all of Facebook’s possible ad categories, or if
these categories were added later. A Facebook spokesman didn’t
respond to a question about when the categories were introduced.
Last
week, acting on a tip, we logged into Facebook’s automated ad
system to see if “Jew hater” was really an ad category. We found
it, but discovered that the category — with only 2,274
people in it —
was too
small for
Facebook to allow us to buy an ad pegged only to Jew haters.
Facebook’s
automated system suggested “Second Amendment” as an additional
category that would boost our audience size to 119,000 people,
presumably because its system had correlated gun enthusiasts with
anti-Semites.
Instead,
we chose additional categories that popped up when
we typed in “jew h”:
“How to burn Jews,” and “History of ‘why jews ruin the
world.’”
Then
we added a category that Facebook suggested when
we typed in “Hitler”:
a category called “Hitler did nothing wrong.” All were described
as “fields of study.”
These
ad categories were tiny. Only
two people were
listed as the audience size for “how
to burn jews,”
and just one for “History of ‘why
jews ruin the world.’” Another
15 people comprised the viewership for “Hitler
did nothing wrong.”
Facebook’s
automated system told us that we still didn’t have a large enough
audience to make a purchase. So we added “German Schutzstaffel,”
commonly known as the Nazi SS, and the “Nazi Party,” which were
both described to advertisers as groups of “employers.” Their
audiences were larger: 3,194
for the SS and 2,449
for Nazi Party.
Still,
Facebook said we needed more — so we added people with an interest
in the National Democratic Party of Germany, a far-right,
ultranationalist political party, with its much larger
viewership of 194,600.
Once
we had our audience, we submitted our ad — which promoted
an unrelated
ProPublica news article.
Within 15 minutes, Facebook approved our ad, with one change. In its
approval screen,
Facebook described the ad targeting category “Jew hater” as
“Antysemityzm,” the Polish word for anti-Semitism. Just to make
sure it was referring to the same category, we bought two additional
ads using the term “Jew hater” in combination
with other terms. Both times,
Facebook changed the ad targeting category “Jew hater” to
“Antisemityzm” in its approval.
Here
is one of our approved ads from Facebook:
A
few days later, Facebook sent us the
results of our campaigns.
Our three ads reached 5,897 people, generating 101 clicks, and 13
“engagements” — which could be a “like” a “share” or a
comment on a post.
Since
we contacted Facebook, most of the anti-Semitic categories
have disappeared.
Facebook
spokesman Joe Osborne said that they didn’t appear to have been
widely used. “We have looked at the use of these audiences and
campaigns and it’s not common or widespread,” he said.
We
looked for analogous advertising categories for other religions, such
as “Muslim haters.” Facebook didn’t have them.
Update,
Sept. 14, 2017: This
story has been updated to include the Facebook spokesman’s name.
Julia Angwin is
a senior reporter at ProPublica. From 2000 to 2013, she was a
reporter at The Wall Street Journal, where she led a privacy
investigative team that was a finalist for a Pulitzer Prize in
Explanatory Reporting in 2011 and won a Gerald Loeb Award in 2010.
Julia.Angwin@propublica.org
@JuliaAngwin
Ariana
is an engagement editor and reporter at ProPublica, where she works
to cultivate communities to inform our coverage.
ariana.tobin@propublica.org
@Ariana_Tobin
=====================================
Zie ook:
‘Hunter Biden zit in de Oekraïense ‘witwas val’‘
‘Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez grilt Zuckerberg over misleidende advertenties op Facebook: liegen in verkiezingstijd is toegestaan‘
‘VS presidentschap wordt gekocht met 100 dollar per uitgebrachte stem‘
‘Michael Bloombergs deelname aan de verkiezingen laten nog eens zien hoe ondemocratisch de VS presidentsverkiezingen zijn‘
‘Media en politiek bepalen waar wel en niet over gesproken wordt >> over manipulatie en desinformatie gesproken‘
‘Tulsi Gabbard (Democratische presidentskandidaat) en de gestoken verkiezingen‘
‘Hillary Clinton manipuleert democratische voorverkiezingen‘
‘Niet Rusland maar Trump beïnvloedt nu al de verkiezingen in Groot-Brittannië‘
‘Ollongren (D66 minister) manipuleerde bevolking met beschuldiging Russische manipulatie door desinformatie en nepnieuws‘ (zie ook de links in dat bericht naar meer berichten over Ollongrens leugens)
‘WaPo waarschuwt voor Russische digitale controle over de hersenen van VS burgers‘
‘Trump tracht met fake news het volk te manipuleren en daarmee de EU te schande te maken‘
‘ALEC is een extreem rechtse lobbyclub: corruptie tot op het hoogste niveau en (echte) beïnvloeding van verkiezingen‘
”Geheime diensten in westen geven toe dat spioneren via het G5 netwerk praktisch onmogelijk is……..‘
‘Bram van Ojik, de Trump van ‘GroenLinks’, wenst geen zaken te doen met Huawei…… OEI!!!‘
‘Federale rechter stelt ten overvloede dat DNC geen grond heeft voor zaak te tegen Trumps verkiezingsteam‘
‘Britse regering weigert RT en Sputnik voor conferentie over persvrijheid….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!‘
‘1984 het boek van George Orwell: niet langer fictie…….‘
‘Het westen vervolgt journalist Assange, Rusland laat journalist vrij na onrust over diens gevangenschap‘ (zie daarin ook de links naar andere berichten over Assange)
‘De sterkste beïnvloeding van de VS presidentsverkiezingen wordt als volkomen ‘legaal’ en normaal gezien‘
‘Avaaz valt met fake news en desinformatie ‘fake news en desinformatie‘ aan……’ (zie in dat bericht ook de link naar een ander artikel met een smerige rol van Avaaz)
‘Rob Jetten (D66 fractievoorzitter) liegt een fikse slag in de rondte in EU verkiezingspraatje‘
‘EU verkiezingen: manipulatie ook door lobbyisme is misdadig, zelfs Bas Eickhout (GroenLinks) doet hieraan mee‘
‘Intel processors al 10 jaar zo lek als een mandje, Intel niet een bedrijf uit Rusland of China, maar uit….. de VS!‘
‘Gelekte documenten tonen aan dat Google en Pinterest censuur uitoefenen‘
‘Facebook stelt klimaatsceptisch Daily Caller aan als ‘factchecker…’ ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!‘
‘Russiagate: nog overtuigd van bestaan daarvan? Lees dit!‘
‘Robert Mueller lijdt aan dementie en maakt van Russiagate een nog belachelijker verhaal‘
‘Putin vraagt en Trump levert: een lijst met ‘alle goede zaken die Trump voor Rusland regelde’‘
Voor de demonstraties en moord in Charlottesville, klik op het label met die plaatsnaam, direct onder dit bericht.
Beste bezoeker, dit was het voor vandaag, morgen meer berichten, maak er zo mogelijk een mooie dag van.
