On the one hand people have free will to believe what they want to - and - apparently - Facebook has no influence or responsibility on that.
On the other hand Facebook is entirely in the business of selling influence to change what people believe.
The meta is that this is a piece trying to influence what people believe about Facebook's influence.
I guess that makes this meta about meta being meta about meta.
Outrage against Facebook being too influential is marketing for Facebook adverts. It's a logical PR strategy. There's a perverse incentive to do it for real, and for Facebook to cause actual harm.
It doesn't matter if anyone in Facebook actually believes that (following a perverse incentive is a good idea). All that needs to happen is for the incentives to be aligned that way. Which might literally be the famed "optimising for engagement". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hn1VxaMEjRU
On the one hand people have free will to believe what they want to - and - apparently - Facebook has no influence or responsibility on that.
On the other hand Facebook is entirely in the business of selling influence to change what people believe.
The meta is that this is a piece trying to influence what people believe about Facebook's influence.
I guess that makes this meta about meta being meta about meta.
Outrage against Facebook being too influential is marketing for Facebook adverts. It's a logical PR strategy. There's a perverse incentive to do it for real, and for Facebook to cause actual harm.
It doesn't matter if anyone in Facebook actually believes that (following a perverse incentive is a good idea). All that needs to happen is for the incentives to be aligned that way. Which might literally be the famed "optimising for engagement". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hn1VxaMEjRU