Fb slams Wall Road Journal studies as ‘deliberate mischaracterisations’ | Fb

Nick Clegg, Facebook’s vice president of global affairs, has criticized the Wall Street Journal for reporting that the social media giant was aware of the negative effects of some of its products.

The newspaper’s work “deliberately misrepresented what we were trying to do and gave outrageously wrong motives to the Facebook leadership and staff,” said the former UK Vice Prime Minister.

The newspaper’s coverage of what Facebook knew about the psychological impact of its Instagram photo platform on the mental health of teenage girls has sparked outrage and calls for increased regulation.

The paper also reported that Facebook content moderation is easy for politicians and celebrities, even if it violates user guidelines, and said that traffickers and drug cartels are taking advantage of Facebook’s reach and growth in developing countries.

In a statement posted on Saturday’s corporate Facebook website entitled “What the Wall Street Journal Got Wrong,” Clegg said the newspaper does not have the full picture of “the toughest issues we face as a company.” – From moderation of content and vaccine misinformation, algorithmic distribution and youth welfare ”.

He also said the coverage was based on selective quotes from internal reports that “should hold up a mirror to ourselves and ask the tough questions of how people interact with social media on a large scale”.

“These are serious and complex problems and it is perfectly legitimate that we should be held accountable for how we deal with them,” wrote Clegg.

“[But] At the center of this series is a downright false accusation: that Facebook researches and then systematically and deliberately ignores it when the results are inconvenient for the company. “

Clegg said Facebook “understands the great responsibility that comes with operating a global platform. We take it seriously and do not shy away from testing and criticism.

“I wish there were easy answers to these questions and that decisions we could make would not involve difficult compromises … [but] this is not the world we live in. “

Comments are closed.