I think it was an episode of the Reply All podcast that opened my eyes to the fact that not listening to microphones and still placing creepily relevant ads is actually the worse possibility.

Ugh, this article makes it sound even worse.

Love this framing of using Meta as “making donations to Mark Zuckerberg.” It nicely describes the idea of digital labor that’s been on my mind for a couple of years now.

This was one of the dumbest parts of all Meta’s announcements and now it’s… basically nothing, too?

Not the headline I would have chosen, but very interesting argument here.

Meta’s cynicism and groveling is pretty appalling.

Some more good writing on a bad situation.

I especially appreciate this article in the wake of Meta’s recent announcements. There are cases in which content moderation is inconsistent or overreaching, and there are cases in which less moderation fixes the problem. However, it’s the arbitrary distinctions and self-serving nature of the changes that make the “free expression” argument so flimsy.

Moderating employees but not users seems telling to me.

See, this is the kind of content moderation we ought to worry about (and why “keep the kids safe” narratives can go horribly wrong).