Re:Mark Zuckerberg Doesn’t Understand Journalism
by GreeniFi on Wednesday May 02, 2018 @07:56PM
(#16982194)
1. Your point about signal and noise is accepted in principle.
2. However, the relational database which FB has built is “unparalleled in human history” in its scope for surveilling the world.
3. The dictators I name would undoubtedly have been very satisfied to use it.
4. Schmuck is name-calling. But as far as schmuck means contemptible, it’s true. In the race to the bottom to build a low friction, high addiction monopoly social network, Facebook and Zuckerberg are the undisputed kings of the jungle.
When the signal is obfuscated by a massive PR and lobbying exercise, then sometimes cutting through that noise to call a spade a spade - or in this case a Zuck a schmuck, is indeed the correct response. I hope this is not a flamewar, but instead see it as my pointing out that metaphor and comparison are rhetorical devices to draw attention to wider truths, and I think that’s fair.
Grandiose phrases like "unparalleled in human existence" similarly lower signal-noise ratio, because they turn up the volume without adding information.
The "schmuck" thing is name-calling, which the site guidelines ask you not to do. Ditto for the "decidedly odd person" swipe, which is a personal attack. We can argue about whether "Zuck" deserves better, but the community certainly does.
Beyond all that, what is the content of the post? You haven't presented any argument about "how to run a country". It's really just rhetoric. I agree with you—most of us do, I'm sure—that the things you listed can have negative consequences in the political sphere. But what those actually are are hard to pin down, and your comment hasn't said anything thoughtful about them.