. . . just because some people -- well, a lot of people -- are incapable of discernment and susceptible to "mind control," as you put it?

Maybe it isn't Facebook and its ilk that need to be rethought. Maybe, instead, it is the notion of universal suffrage that should be rethought. That is to say, if it's necessary to get rid of Facebook and the like in order to protect the American people from themselves, maybe the real issue is that the American people aren't actually fit to govern themselves. Maybe there should be a serious debate about that.

It's psychological warfare. And it is evil.

And I'll happily concede that it is "evil," whatever that means.

But we're not talking about a situation where millions of American voters were physically kidnapped and subjected to literal brainwashing or whatever over a period of weeks or months or years. We're talking about people reading headlines, or the first few lines of a fake story, on a social media website and choosing to believe such things to be "true," because what they were reading fit in with their preexisting (mis)conceptions.

At the same time, plenty of people saw the same stuff and dismissed it out of hand. Presumably you did, no?. I use Facebook -- I like Facebook; for instance, it allows me and my wife a convenient and non-obtrusive way to keep apprised of the comings and goings of our daughter and son-in-law, who live out of state -- and I suppose I never even noticed that there even were links to "news" stories on the page.

My point remains: maybe a people who can be so easily "mind controlled" by self-evident nonsense and obviously false political propaganda, just because it fits in so well with their preexisting dimwitted view of the world, aren't fit to govern themselves in the first place.

Regardless, it would appear that, this time around, the Russians caught us wrong-footed. Well, bravo to them, then, I guess. We must do better. If crimes were committed along the way, they should prosecuted. If it is determined -- and of course this is the case, whether or not Mueller will choose ultimately to say this to the American people -- that Trump and/or his people were active participants in the operation, the country can decide, politically, what should be done about it.

Otherwise, you either believe in self-government or you don't (or, I suppose, you are skeptical of it). Personally, when I survey the lay of the political and social landscape, I have no problem saying that Trump is pretty much what this country deserves, at this point.

eliminated and replaced with a paid subscription service. Data collection on anyone should not be allowed. fakebook was instrumental in getting drumpf elected making them an enemy of the Democratic Party.

I also worry about the effects on our formative youth - there's the real danger long-term.

..........

Last edited Sun Mar 18, 2018, 10:26 AM - Edit history (1)

Many are naive enough to believe that they are talking only to their "friends," and post their entire lives online.

"See ya, Trudy. I'll be gone for a week. Key in the flower pot."

A post like this could/would lead to a burglary. But the darker side of Facebook has shown us how putting information about ourselves online can cost us our freedom. And anyone who thinks our freedoms are not in danger under Trump is a fool.

I don't use social media (other than read a few experts I trust on Twitter), and so will talk with my family about those risks.

The most corrosive effects to me is the slow removal of old-fashioned face-to-face, honest kitchen table communications. The plutocrats prefer we stay in a little box and communicate only in ways they can influence or completely control. Sadly, they also control most all of our main-stream media.

Build fences and divide and conquer, isolate and instill fear - right out of the plutocrat's playbook.

At least anyone who is not brainwashed should.

they say well I only read posts from family or I don't pay attention to that stuff it doesn't affect me. AAARG!!

The Cambridge Analytica Files from The Guardian UK.
See: https://www.theguardian.com/news/series/cambridge-analytica-files

This is a great series I'm still trying to digest (it's a head-spinner).

For example,
See: https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/17/cambridge-analytica-facebook-influence-us-election
(snip)
Documents seen by the Observer, and confirmed by a Facebook statement, show that by late 2015 the company had found out that information had been harvested on an unprecedented scale. However, at the time it failed to alert users and took only limited steps to recover and secure the private information of more than 50 million individuals.

----------------
Also see: https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/17/data-war-whistleblower-christopher-wylie-faceook-nix-bannon-trump
‘I made Steve Bannon’s psychological warfare tool’: meet the data war whistleblower"

And it's going to take a while for it to be fully understood. Hopefully, Rachel, a great "explainer," will cover this.

Interesting how Steve Bannon keeps turning up under every rock.

We need a platform that is the anti Facebook. A social media site that doesn’t sell data and whose advertising is more random. One committed to protecting privacy and freedom.

You could market it as the anti Facebook and people would join just for that.

And even then, it would be subject to malicious hackers.

Seems that humanity wasn't prepared for online social media. But there's no putting that genie back in the bottle.

But Facebook should do something about those apps/quizzes that take over your life. I won't engage in anything that is going to require me to sign my life away!