LRB · John Lanchester · You Are the Product: It Zucks!

A detailed critique of Facebook. Excerpts:

On The Attention Merchants: The Epic Scramble to Get Inside Our Heads by Tim Wu :

Wu argues that capturing and reselling attention has been the basic model for a large number of modern businesses, from posters in late 19th-century Paris, through the invention of mass-market newspapers that made their money not through circulation but through ad sales, to the modern industries of advertising and ad-funded TV. Facebook is in a long line of such enterprises, though it might be the purest ever example of a company whose business is the capture and sale of attention. Very little new thinking was involved in its creation. As Wu observes, Facebook is ‘a business with an exceedingly low ratio of invention to success’.

Popular media portrayal vs reality:

The movie Zuckerberg is a highly credible character, a computer genius located somewhere on the autistic spectrum with minimal to non-existent social skills. But that’s not what the man is really like. In real life, Zuckerberg was studying for a degree with a double concentration in computer science and – this is the part people tend to forget – psychology. People on the spectrum have a limited sense of how other people’s minds work; autists, it has been said, lack a ‘theory of mind’. Zuckerberg, not so much. He is very well aware of how people’s minds work and in particular of the social dynamics of popularity and status. The initial launch of Facebook was limited to people with a Harvard email address; the intention was to make access to the site seem exclusive and aspirational. (And also to control site traffic so that the servers never went down. Psychology and computer science, hand in hand.) Then it was extended to other elite campuses in the US. When it launched in the UK, it was limited to Oxbridge and the LSE. The idea was that people wanted to look at what other people like them were doing, to see their social networks, to compare, to boast and show off, to give full rein to every moment of longing and envy, to keep their noses pressed against the sweet-shop window of others’ lives.

Peter Thiel’s reason to invest in Facebook:

Girard was a Christian, and his view of human nature is that it is fallen. We don’t know what we want or who we are; we don’t really have values and beliefs of our own; what we have instead is an instinct to copy and compare. We are homo mimeticus. ‘Man is the creature who does not know what to desire, and who turns to others in order to make up his mind. We desire what others desire because we imitate their desires.’ Look around, ye petty, and compare. The reason Thiel latched onto Facebook with such alacrity was that he saw in it for the first time a business that was Girardian to its core: built on people’s deep need to copy. ‘Facebook first spread by word of mouth, and it’s about word of mouth, so it’s doubly mimetic,’ Thiel said. ‘Social media proved to be more important than it looked, because it’s about our natures.’ We are keen to be seen as we want to be seen, and Facebook is the most popular tool humanity has ever had with which to do that.


Double standards on taking responsibility of the content on the Facebook platform:

One man’s fake news is another’s truth-telling, and Facebook works hard at avoiding responsibility for the content on its site – except for sexual content, about which it is super-stringent. Nary a nipple on show. It’s a bizarre set of priorities, which only makes sense in an American context, where any whiff of explicit sexuality would immediately give the site a reputation for unwholesomeness. Photos of breastfeeding women are banned and rapidly get taken down. Lies and propaganda are fine.

The key to understanding this is to think about what advertisers want: they don’t want to appear next to pictures of breasts because it might damage their brands, but they don’t mind appearing alongside lies because the lies might be helping them find the consumers they’re trying to target.


On the impact on content creators and how users are free labor for FB:

A neutral observer might wonder if Facebook’s attitude to content creators is sustainable. Facebook needs content, obviously, because that’s what the site consists of: content that other people have created. It’s just that it isn’t too keen on anyone apart from Facebook making any money from that content. Over time, that attitude is profoundly destructive to the creative and media industries. Access to an audience – that unprecedented two billion people – is a wonderful thing, but Facebook isn’t in any hurry to help you make money from it. If the content providers all eventually go broke, well, that might not be too much of a problem. There are, for now, lots of willing providers: anyone on Facebook is in a sense working for Facebook, adding value to the company. In 2014, the New York Times did the arithmetic and found that humanity was spending 39,757 collective years on the site, every single day. Jonathan Taplin points out that this is ‘almost fifteen million years of free labour per year’. That was back when it had a mere 1.23 billion users.

The biggest surveillance machine:

So Facebook knows your phone ID and can add it to your Facebook ID. It puts that together with the rest of your online activity: not just every site you’ve ever visited, but every click you’ve ever made – the Facebook button tracks every Facebook user, whether they click on it or not. Since the Facebook button is pretty much ubiquitous on the net, this means that Facebook sees you, everywhere. Now, thanks to its partnerships with the old-school credit firms, Facebook knew who everybody was, where they lived, and everything they’d ever bought with plastic in a real-world offline shop.4 All this information is used for a purpose which is, in the final analysis, profoundly bathetic. It is to sell you things via online ads.

[…]

What this means is that even more than it is in the advertising business, Facebook is in the surveillance business. Facebook, in fact, is the biggest surveillance-based enterprise in the history of mankind. It knows far, far more about you than the most intrusive government has ever known about its citizens. It’s amazing that people haven’t really understood this about the company. I’ve spent time thinking about Facebook, and the thing I keep coming back to is that its users don’t realise what it is the company does. What Facebook does is watch you, and then use what it knows about you and your behaviour to sell ads. I’m not sure there has ever been a more complete disconnect between what a company says it does – ‘connect’, ‘build communities’ – and the commercial reality. Note that the company’s knowledge about its users isn’t used merely to target ads but to shape the flow of news to them. Since there is so much content posted on the site, the algorithms used to filter and direct that content are the thing that determines what you see: people think their news feed is largely to do with their friends and interests, and it sort of is, with the crucial proviso that it is their friends and interests as mediated by the commercial interests of Facebook. Your eyes are directed towards the place where they are most valuable for Facebook.


Conclusion:

Automation and artificial intelligence are going to have a big impact in all kinds of worlds. These technologies are new and real and they are coming soon. Facebook is deeply interested in these trends. We don’t know where this is going, we don’t know what the social costs and consequences will be, we don’t know what will be the next area of life to be hollowed out, the next business model to be destroyed, the next company to go the way of Polaroid or the next business to go the way of journalism or the next set of tools and techniques to become available to the people who used Facebook to manipulate the elections of 2016. We just don’t know what’s next, but we know it’s likely to be consequential, and that a big part will be played by the world’s biggest social network. On the evidence of Facebook’s actions so far, it’s impossible to face this prospect without unease.


PS: On a related note, I am investing time and energy building this grad community forum, so we don’t have to depend on an external entity like Google or Facebook in the long run. It’s been so hard to help people see what Facebook is really about and consider an alternative like this forum in my soon-to-be year-long effort. If you read this far and/or something above resonated with you, do you have suggestions for sustaining this effort?

More on Facebook, targeted advertising and Zuck

FB
Deleted old FB Spring 2017 before coming to America. Got a ‘shell’ account to allow me to access certain FB-only societal benefits.
I would like to think that process hurt FB’s attempts to track me onlline & target ads. My concern is that they have simply linked my new account to the old one.

Alternative platforms
Word on Discourse as a great alternative.
I’m using LinkedIn & Medium: medium.com/@lpwarner
I would love to be able to block the news feeds for those.
On Firefox I use for FB: News Feed Eradicator – Get this Extension for 🦊 Firefox (en-US)

There doesn’t exist one for LinkedIn, even on Chrome. Closest I’ve seen is these instructions: Installing the extension CustomBlocker, going to linkedin.com/feed and adding a new rule that blocks the entire feed-area on that page (In “Elements to Hide”, write: DIV.core-rail>DIV.ember-view and select “Block Anyway”, under “Condition”).
For Chrome: CustomBlocker - Chrome Web Store
Anyone know if anything similar exists for Firefox?

Laurence

I bet you can just custom block the <div> containing the feed on LinkedIn fairly easily with an ad blocker like uBlock Origin – Get this Extension for 🦊 Firefox (en-US)

Personally, I just never visit the LinkedIn homepage, my workflow involves opening LinkedIn, Medium, Quora, etc only when I get email notifications from them, or someone shares a link (even a Google search) to a specific post (or profiles in case of LinkedIn), so I was never bothered by the feeds on those sites.

Any comments on a decentralized social network like this?
https://diasporafoundation.org/

I am not sure how to answer this. Decentralization is probably a good thing, but UChicago’s problem is too much decentralization – not the other way round.

If you have specific points that you would like to discuss, I am happy to talk more.

Might be an interesting read. I have tried some of these experiments: #1, #2 and #4 what currently works for me is a mix of all of them. Limiting time with a tool like StayFocusd never worked for me.

The Chrome extensions I use that helps (cc: @lpwarner, but this is not everything, only social media related):

Agree with him on power of addition. Why I’m always looking to do fun tings on a Sunday (no laptop day)!

Here be my current state of add-ons:

You’ll be amused to see 2 different Facebook blockers (to cover all bases). I always trial an add-on for 1 week and then evaluate. Am doing that for the Firefox version of DF Tube (DF YouTube (Distraction Free) – Get this Extension for 🦊 Firefox (en-US)). Believe it’s same dude has ported it. Wonder if anyone knows how to contact the dev.

1 Like