Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by abathur 1988 days ago
They are separate problems.

Engagement is still roughly "our" problem, because ad-driven ~media are externalizing the costs of engagement on society. This is where the Upton Sinclair quote fits.

Moderation is still roughly the platform's problem because it comes with liabilities they can't readily externalize. Engagement certainly overlaps with this, but most of these liabilities exist regardless of engagement.

1 comments

Engagement _is_ moderation! When FB chooses what to show you, it's already moderating things but simply using a different value system. The're a pushback on "censorship" today but censorship has been happening for years.
We may be playing semantics games, here?

Mechanisms that optimize for increased engagement via dynamic suggestions for a user's feed or ~related content are not moderation (unless, perhaps, the algorithmic petting zoo is the only way to use the service).

This is exactly why I'm drawing a distinction.

Many of a platform's legal and civil liabilities for user-submitted content are poorly correlated with how many people see it and whether it is promoted by The Algorithm (though the chance it gets noticed probably correlates). This is ~compliance work.

Their reputational liabilities are a little more correlated with whether or not anyone is actually encountering the content (and more about how the content is affecting people, than its legality). This is ~PR work.