Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Privacy Apple

Apple's Tim Cook Criticizes Social Media Practices, Intensifying Facebook Conflict (reuters.com) 42

Posted by msmash from the tussle-continues dept.
Apple Chief Executive Officer Tim Cook on Thursday criticized polarization and misinformation on social media, intensifying a conflict between the iPhone maker and Facebook. From a report: In remarks delivered at the Computers, Privacy and Data Protection conference, Cook critiqued apps that he argued collect too much personal information and prioritize "conspiracy theories and violent incitement simply because of their high rates of engagement." "At a moment of rampant disinformation and conspiracy theories juiced by algorithms, we can no longer turn a blind eye to a theory of technology that says all engagement is good engagement -- the longer the better -- and all with the goal of collecting as much data as possible," Cook said.

He did not name Facebook, but the two companies have been in a high-profile dispute. Apple is preparing to implement privacy notifications that many in the digital advertising industry believe will cause some users to decline to allow the use of ad-targeting tools. Facebook has accused Apple of anticompetitive conduct because Apple has a growing catalog of paid apps and its own digital advertising business. Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg on Wednesday said Apple has "every incentive to use their dominant platform position to interfere with how our apps and other apps work." Cook on Thursday criticized social media practices that he said undermine public trust in vaccines and encourage users to join extremist groups.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple's Tim Cook Criticizes Social Media Practices, Intensifying Facebook Conflict More

Apple's Tim Cook Criticizes Social Media Practices, Intensifying Facebook Conflict

Comments Filter:

  • I have to agree with Tim Cook (Score:5, Interesting)

    by FudRucker ( 866063 ) on Thursday January 28, 2021 @04:16PM (#61002674)
    Facebook is just awful, their primary source of income is advertising revenue and data-mining and if conspiracy theories the led to the Jan 6 lame attempt at insurrection make facebook money then facebook is partly responsible for turning a blind eye to it because it means facebook was more interested in the money the advert revenue and data-mining than keeping the peace in the nation

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by parker9 ( 60593 )

      "if ... then facebook is partly responsible"

      There is no "if".

      • Re: I have to agree with Tim Cook (Score:4, Insightful)

        by saloomy ( 2817221 ) on Thursday January 28, 2021 @05:11PM (#61002952)
        As dismayed as I am about the insurrection, I have to respectfully disagree with the sentiment that a hosting platform is responsible. Facebook provide a software solution to allow people to connect with one another. They then datamine those connections in the hopes of placing relevant ads in peoples feeds. Whatever you may think of that practice, it is not that evil. What is evil is reaching out to other sites through the Facebook like button web assets and building profiles on non Facebook users. They are paying the cost (send to facebooks servers their browsing habits) without reaping the benefits (connecting with friends). I wrote a JavaScript function that enables the social media like buttons so youâ(TM)d have to click twice to like a post or share it, but I donâ(TM)t load the Facebook or Twitter content at page load, only afte the user enables social media functions, specifically to stop them following my users on my site with their assets.

        All that being said, I dont think its wise to blame Facebook for the content their users post. I also dont think we should encourage these platforms to silence Americans, irrespective of whether or not we agree with the message. Its like the old saying: I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend your right to say it.

        That if course assumes Facebook is not specifically amplifying this content. If they are, that is a different case entirely.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by necro81 ( 917438 )

          I have to respectfully disagree with the sentiment that a hosting platform is responsible. Facebook provide a software solution to allow people to connect with one another. They then datamine those connections in the hopes of placing relevant ads in peoples feeds.

          And I have to respectfully disagree with you. Facebook is not, not, merely a hosting platform or software solution. If they were only hosting content, your argument might hold up. But Facebook does much more than that: it actively manipulates

          • I understand where you are coming from. If their engagement algo finds objectionable content because they know it will keep you, then shame on them. But if their algo is finding content that has kept you engaged, irrespective of the contents and is finding more of the same, then thatâ(TM)s just how your cookie crumbled. You canâ(TM)t blame them for giving you what you want, If what you want is someone someone else finds objectionable. You CAN blame them if they are serving everyone content they kn
    • But but but... they banned Trump... after his failed campaign, once he'd already spent over $130 million with them and they weren't likely to get any more money from him so it didn't matter.

  • I am starting to consider Apple (Score:4, Insightful)

    by The-Ixian ( 168184 ) on Thursday January 28, 2021 @04:22PM (#61002700)

    I have been a long time Android user but Apple's stance on privacy is starting to make me consider using an iPhone....

    • Unless of course, you want privacy from *them*.

      I think they could not care less about your privacy, and this is only Apple's usual "Thou shalt have no other gods before me". But of course, this way, it can be beautifully milked for I virtue signaling.

      Call me when there is no iCloud and I'm in control of my own damn hardware and data, and nor Apple.
      Cause, you know, I want to be a person. Not an externalization of the Apple swarm lifeform queen.

    • Re:I am starting to consider Apple (Score:5, Interesting)

      by hdyoung ( 5182939 ) on Thursday January 28, 2021 @05:07PM (#61002928)
      It's actually real simple. You can divide up the internet into three categories:

      a) the part you pay for by giving up data and watching ads
      b) the part you pay for with real money through device purchases or subscriptions
      c) the part that's completely free haha I'm kidding nothing is free what were you born yesterday?

      Android and Facebook are category a while Apple is category b. The different business models pushes them towards COMPLETELY DIFFERENT behavior. Android and Facebook need you engaged constantly and giving up info. That's how they make their money. That's why they exist.

      Apple makes their money from the up-front costs of their devices, which are admittedly a tad eye-watering. Since I paid paid for my device up front, I have certain expectations in terms of quality of service and privacy, and if Apple fails to deliver, my next purchase might be something other than Apple. Apple's entire business model lives and dies on the quality of their services and the privacy that I have come to expect from them. They have NO INCENTIVE to sell my data. Also, Apple doesn't give a rats ass if I use my phone 15 minutes or 4 hours each day, so they design their system to simply facilitate what I want to do, and don't play psychological games to hook me on this or that feature. This is what I get for paying a few extra hundred bucks per device.

      As I've gotten older, I've come to realize that I much prefer category B. I switched to Apple years ago and haven't looked back. I realize it's a walled garden. It does cost some extra dollars, but worth it to me and I'm there by choice. If there was a subscription version of Google I'd replace that as well.

      Free services are not free.

      • It's actually real simple. You can divide up the internet into three categories:

        c) the part that's completely free haha I'm kidding nothing is free what were you born yesterday? ...
        Free services are not free.

        I understand what you're getting at, and your characterization of categories A and B are accurate. There *are* more than a handful of examples of category C, though. I mean, strictly speaking I'd argue that category C are things where "the cost is fully externalized", but they do exist.

        While most of the major open source projects has some sort of corporate backing somewhere along the line, CentOS was actually-free because most of the development cost was fronted by people who buy RHEL support contracts. I r

        • Good point. I should have limited my discussion to SERVICES. You're right that some open-source SOFTWARE can be fully free with no strings attached.
  • His group knocked out Parler because Apple didn't like the same things Facebook didn't like.

    So how can Cook criticize Facebook for doing EXACTLY what Apple did?

    Investigators found the capital protests were doing a lot of their activities through Facebook as well!

    Did Apple drop Facebook off their app store? Did AWS drop them?
    • because parlor is doing the same thing facebook is doing, enabling those ringwinghit tinfoil asshats that did the Capitol building raid on Jan 6

      • Your partisan mind did not get the point:
        He's doing exactly the same!

        So... is is right now, or is it wrong?
        Him punishing people for it suggests he thinks it is wrong.
        Him *doing* it highly suggests he thins it is *right*.
        Everyone not batshit insane, screaming: CHOOSE *ONE*, MOTHERFUCKER!

    • oh and if i was Tim Cook i would remove the facebook app, and messenger, and what else is owned by the same group of carpetbaggers, whatsapp? kick that off too

  • Read what they did to Gab [archive.org] and how they basically said there are two sets of rules in how they judge who can have an app that is a mere pass through to a separate service.

    Apple has strong-armed Telegram into shutting down foreign protesters' channels [osnews.com] at the behest of foreign governments.

    Facebook might take down content in foreign countries, Apple is forcing others to bend the knee.

    • Seems like Apple is not alone, If you are peddling something like this, do not be surprised when lots of companies simply want nothing to do with you. And boy oh boy, did that come to pass. "Woe is me... nobody wants to help fund my hate-hole."

  • The standard answer to social media censorship has always been "start your own $SERVICE, and you can do what you want".

    Of course, starting your own $SERVICE also entails starting your own AWS, Visa, and (depending on the service) ICANN.

    This is actually happening. I've read proposals to "fix" the internet and the current state of online censorship, and some of them make sense and are being actively worked on.

    Basically, your information - including your tweets, facebook posts, videos, and personal information

    • the internet dont need to be "fixed"

      we still have freedom of speech, but people need to realize that with freedom of speech there is also accountability, so people need to be held accountable for the crap they post, its one thing to do some trolling, but when you run a campaign of disinformation and propaganda full time like what caused and led up to the Jan 6th raid on the capitol then they should be held accountable

  • ...we can no longer turn a blind eye to a theory of technology that says all engagement is good engagement...

    Yeah, because Tim Cook knows a thing or two [slashdot.org] about 'turning a blind eye'....

  • FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!

    And make it real damn bloody!

    Popcorn anyone?

  • To be hoonest, I would not piss on Apple or their leadership if they were on fire. However, in this case Tim Cook has a point, and as much as I dislike Apple and their approach to products and customers I am just as antipathetic toward Facebook and the slimy turd running that shit show.
    Sure, there are other newer/smaller social media companies who seem to be trying to be so bad they make Facebook look good, but still none of them make me feel unclean and in desperate need of a shower the way I do whenever I

  • Inductive generalizations (Score:3)

    by anegg ( 1390659 ) on Thursday January 28, 2021 @05:16PM (#61002984)

    I think Tim Cook is using inductive logic to come up with a generalization about certain aspects of our current technology environment. Simplifying what he is saying to "Facebook bad" is missing the forest for the trees. Facebook may be one of the examples from which he is generalizing, but I suspect he has more than just one.

    Let's have a debate about what he said (the concepts and ideas) and not about the relative values of current players.

  • Kettle and Pot keep arguing about who is blacker.

  • I see Mark is taking a page from the Trump administration: Put the great big giant lie right out front, unashamedly, and then start furiously building on top of that.

    "Dominant market position?"

    No, sorry, Mark. You may complain and whine, but you do not actually deserve to stick your social media junk inside everything large or small.

    If Apple wants you to announce what you do to your customers before you enter their walled garden, they can. So f*$&% get with the program and announce it. 90% of the pe

Slashdot Top Deals

Friction is a drag.

Close