2021年5月5日 星期三

On Tech: The limits of Facebook’s ‘Supreme Court’

What happens on Facebook has such big consequences, its Oversight Board can only do so much.

The limits of Facebook's 'Supreme Court'

Barney McCann

What Facebook calls its "Supreme Court" ruled on Wednesday that it was the right decision for the company to kick former President Donald J. Trump off the platform after his posts about the riot at the U.S. Capitol in January.

Well, sort of. In a sign of how weird this whole decision was, the Oversight Board punted the call about Trump's account back to Facebook. He might reappear on Facebook in a few months. Or he might not.

Let me explain the decision, its potential implications and the serious limits of Facebook's Oversight Board.

Wait, what is happening to Trump's account?

Facebook indefinitely suspended Trump after he used the site to condone the actions of the Capitol rioters and, as Mark Zuckerberg said, "to incite violent insurrection against a democratically elected government."

Facebook's Oversight Board, a quasi-independent body that the company created to review some of its high-profile decisions, essentially agreed on Wednesday that Facebook was right to suspend Trump. His posts broke Facebook's guidelines and presented a clear and present danger of potential violence, the board said.

But the board also said that Facebook was wrong to make Trump's suspension indefinite. When people break Facebook's rules, the company has policies to delete the violating material, suspend the account holder for a defined period of time or permanently disable an account. The board said Facebook should re-examine the penalty against Trump and within six months choose a time-limited ban or a permanent one rather than let the squishy suspension remain.

Facebook has to make the hard calls:

A big "wow" line from the Oversight Board was its criticism of Facebook for passing the buck on what to do about Trump. "In applying a vague, standardless penalty and then referring this case to the board to resolve, Facebook seeks to avoid its responsibilities," the board wrote.

The quietly scathing part on influential Facebook users:

The meat of the board's statement is a brutal assessment of Facebook's errors in considering the substance of people's messages, and not the context.

ADVERTISEMENT

Facebook currently treats your neighbor with five followers the same as Trump and others with huge followings.

(Actually, at least when he was president, Trump had even more leeway in his posts than your neighbor. Facebook and Twitter have said that the public should generally be able to see and hear for themselves what their leaders say, even if they're spreading misinformation.)

The Oversight Board agreed that the same rules should continue to apply to everyone on Facebook — but with some big caveats.

"Context matters when assessing issues of causality and the probability and imminence of harm," the board wrote. "What is important is the degree of influence that a user has over other users."

ADVERTISEMENT

With world leaders, the Oversight Board said that Facebook should suspend accounts if they repeatedly "posted messages that pose a risk of harm under international human rights norms."

To this I say, heck yes. The Oversight Board showed that it understands the ways that Facebook is giving repeat superspreaders of bogus information a dangerous pathway to shape our beliefs.

The limits of the Oversight Board:

It is remarkable that in its first year of operation, this board seems to grasp some of Facebook's fundamental flaws: The company's policies are opaque, and its judgments are too often flawed or incomprehensible. The board repeatedly, including on Wednesday, has urged Facebook to be far more transparent. This is a useful measure of accountability.

But the last year has also proved the grave limitations of this check on Facebook's power.

Facebook makes millions of judgment calls each day on people's posts and accounts. Most of the people who think Facebook made a mistake will never get heard by the board.

ADVERTISEMENT

This includes those who have had their Facebook accounts disabled and are desperate for help to get them back, people who wind up in Facebook "jail" and don't know which of the company's zillions of opaque rules they might have broken and others who are harassed after someone posted something malicious about them. It includes journalists in the Philippines whose work is undermined by government officials regularly trashing them anonymously on the site.

The oversight board is a useful backstop to some of Facebook's hard calls, but it is a complete mismatch to the fast pace of communications among billions of people that, by design, happen with little human intervention.

I'm also bothered by the Supreme Court comparison for this oversight body that Facebook invented and pays for. Facebook is not a representative democracy with branches of government that keep a check on one another. It is a castle ruled by an all-powerful king who has invited billions of people inside to mingle — but only if they abide by opaque, ever changing rules that are often applied by a fleet of mostly lower-wage workers making rapid-fire judgment calls.

The Oversight Board is good, but the scale of Facebook and its consequences are so vast that the body can only do so much.

If you don't already get this newsletter in your inbox, please sign up here.

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

If you've found this newsletter helpful, please consider subscribing to The New York Times — with this special offer. Your support makes our work possible.

Before we go …

  • Peloton is recalling its home treadmills: A U.S. safety commission had warned about dozens of injuries and one child's death that were linked to the machines. My colleague Daniel Victor wrote that Peloton said it made a mistake by initially fighting the agency's request to recall the $4,295 treadmills.
  • One family's story of pandemic learning: Jordyn Coleman, an 11-year-old in Mississippi, said he used to like school but his grades and attendance have suffered because of inadequate technology for virtual classes and pandemic disruptions in his family. My colleague Rukmini Callimachi spent time with Jordyn, who she wrote is among the children at risk of "becoming one of the lost students of the coronavirus pandemic."
  • Jake from State Farm ENDLESSLY: It's not your imagination if you feel like you see the same commercials over and over on streaming video sites like Hulu and Peacock. Bloomberg News says that the unruly mess of streaming video is making it hard for advertisers to know how many times their commercials are being shown and where.

Hugs to this

The main branch of San Francisco's public library reopened to in-person browsing for the first time in more than a year. You have to watch this video of excited patrons who are greeted by clapping and cheering library staff.

(The man who was the first in line told The San Francisco Chronicle, "The library is like my best friend.")

We want to hear from you. Tell us what you think of this newsletter and what else you'd like us to explore. You can reach us at ontech@nytimes.com.

If you don't already get this newsletter in your inbox, please sign up here.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for On Tech with Shira Ovide from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

LiveIntent LogoAdChoices Logo

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

歡迎蒞臨:https://ofa588.com/

娛樂推薦:https://www.ofa86.com/

When Grown-Ups Have Imaginary Friends

"Parasocial relationships" explain why you think influencers are your pals.

When Grown-Ups Have Imaginary Friends

Anja Slibar

This weekend I had multiple text threads going about Hannah's issues with her housemates, and whether she was in the wrong in her fights with Amanda, Luke and Kyle. These are not friends of mine; these are people who appear on the Bravo TV show "Summer House," whose drama I am embarrassingly invested in, and whose psychological motivations I spend time dissecting with friends and co-workers.

The kind of one-way friendship I have with these reality stars has a name in the sociology world: It's called a "parasocial relationship," which is an emotional relationship with a media figure. The term was coined in the 1950s by two sociologists who observed that dominant mass media — at the time, TV and radio — created the illusion of a friendship between spectator and performer, and "the most remote and illustrious men are met as if they were in the circle of one's peers."

Social media has added another dimension to this dynamic, because occasionally the performers will interact with you, which perpetuates the illusion that you have involvement in their lives.

Though explaining these friendships may make you feel like a creep, they are normal, and quite common, said Alex Kresovich, a doctoral student at the U.N.C. Hussman School of Journalism and Media who has published research on parasocial relationships. "The feelings people have with these media persona are nearly indistinguishable from their friends in real life," despite the fact that the celebrity in question usually (but not always) has no idea you exist, he said. (A small subset of people may develop an unhealthy obsession with celebrities — it's called "celebrity worship" in the clinical literature — but that's not the norm.)

Amanda Hess, a critic at large for the Times, wrote about her parasocial relationship with the Peloton instructor Cody Rigsby, explaining that his "sweetly annoying" conversation helps her sweat through 45 minutes and tricks her into feeling bonded to him. Tara Tsukamoto, 35, a mom of two kids in Elk Grove, Calif., who does daily workouts with Sydney Cummings, a YouTube star with more than 1 million subscribers, said her 4-year-old son recognizes Ms. Cummings and asked if she was going to come over to their house.

ADVERTISEMENT

"I know we aren't really friends, but I do kind of feel like I know her," Ms. Tsukamoto said. "Also even though we've never met she provides a lot of what a real friend would: advice, funny stories, inspiration to become a better version of myself."

Ms. Tsukamoto has hit on one of the upsides of parasocial relationships: Decades of research have shown that our identification with celebrities may affect health behavior. Mr. Kresovich did a meta analysis of 14 studies that showed people with a sense of attachment to a particular celebrity are more likely than nonfans to change their behavior after that celebrity discloses a health condition or creates a media event around a health condition.

For example, when Katie Couric got an on-air colonoscopy in 2000, after her first husband died from colon cancer, it led to a significant increase in colon cancer screenings; and when Charlie Sheen disclosed that he had H.I.V. in 2015, it led to an uptick in the purchasing of home-testing kits that researchers described as "astonishing." The downside is that celebrity health behavior can be also be influential when it's not actually promoting public health, as with many high-profile people who are skeptical of vaccines.

For parents of young children in particular, these parasocial relationships may be especially nourishing, because we don't always have much time for socializing, and parasocial relationships don't require any maintenance. We can dip in and out of them as we please. Georgeanna Connors, 37, who has two children under 4 in Asheville, N.C., said that while she doesn't consider the sleep, feeding and behavioral specialists she follows on Instagram "friends," exactly, "the advice and faux, one-way dialogue I absorb from their posts certainly displaces real conversations and relationship building. Why play phone tag with a friend when I can get free, immediate, zero-judgment input from an expert?"

ADVERTISEMENT

Even though parents like Ms. Connors may feel her parasocial relationships displace real life bonds, there is not much evidence that people form these relationships with media figures to compensate for a social deficiency in their own lives, said Luke MacNeill, a postdoctoral fellow at the University of New Brunswick in Canada. Pretty much everyone forms these relationships to some degree, he said, and it's more that "people have an innate drive to connect with other people."

Although I am now seeing my own friends in person more frequently (but not that frequently), I find I am still missing gossip, which remains in short supply. That's what I'm getting out of my parasocial relationships with various reality stars: the vicarious thrill of transgression and conflict, aggression and resolution. Or, as an academic summary of research on parasocial relationships put it: "Taken together, these findings imply that parasocial phenomena affect well-being, simply by providing 'a good time' and turning media exposure into an enjoyable experience." In other words, it's just fun to watch attractive people yell at one another in a fancy house, and I will continue to do it until someone makes me stop.

Want More on Parasocial Relationships?

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

If you've found this newsletter helpful, please consider subscribing to The New York Times — with this special offer. Your support makes our work possible.

Tiny Victories

Parenting can be a grind. Let's celebrate the tiny victories.

There is just too much cooking during the pandemic, so I listened to the parenting hack from my 13-year-old, who was "parenting" our 7-year-old. He created the "one cereal night a week" rule for getting out of a dinner he didn't want to eat. The other six nights, you make do. Done. — Heather Link, Shelburne, Vt.

If you want a chance to get your Tiny Victory published, find us on Instagram @NYTparenting and use the hashtag #tinyvictories; email us; or enter your Tiny Victory at the bottom of this page. Include your full name and location. Tiny Victories may be edited for clarity and style. Your name, location and comments may be published, but your contact information will not. By submitting to us, you agree that you have read, understand and accept the Reader Submission Terms in relation to all of the content and other information you send to us.

ADVERTISEMENT

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for NYT Parenting from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

LiveIntent LogoAdChoices Logo

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

歡迎蒞臨:https://ofa588.com/

娛樂推薦:https://www.ofa86.com/