And perhaps that's the issue. Mozilla doesn't seem to be particularly interested in acknowledging the position in which their browser now exists, or even listening to the feedback and criticism that arose around it in the last, let's say, 15 years. It literally does everything else but focusing on the browser development or figuring out how to make it attractive again. Changing the UI of Firefox once again to the somewhat dull bulky mobile-oriented modern style (for a browser which was always a desktop software) doesn't constitutes as a progress or helps the popularity and that's the only big change done in the last months.
This post done by Mitchell Baker is about american politics and the outcome of events from the last year and what Mozilla (assuming that's Foundation statement and not only Baker's) seems to suggest as "solutions" against. And I'd say that's the reason this submission is being flagged.
It's less relevant because a year ago everyone was talking about the presidential election and the disinformation campaigns on social networks (cough Facebook), but the issue is much less talked of these days.
- Additional precise and specific actions must also be taken:
- Reveal who is paying for advertisements, how much they are paying and who is being targeted.
- Commit to meaningful transparency of platform algorithms so we know how and what content is being amplified, to whom, and the associated impact.
- Turn on by default the tools to amplify factual voices over disinformation. [links to Facebook algorithm deliberately promoting engaging disinformation]
- Work with independent researchers to facilitate in-depth studies of the platforms’ impact on people and our societies, and what we can do to improve things.
Edit: I think flagging should ask for a reason to display with the flag. I have no idea why someone would flag this without at least reading the very short article and realizing it's not flag worthy.