Krugman Substack post: "America Has Become a Digital Narco-State"

[Brian]

Yay-social media! Yay-tech bros!

This post speaks to some of the issues mentioned in the "Monetization of Rage" post from last week.

I've gotta say that for some time now I've wondered if the web ought to have a warning label on it, sorta like on a pack of cigarettes!

As most folks here probably know, we live in "Silicon Valley", and it kinda chaps our hides that social media has been the biggest thing to come out of this place in quite some time. We're considerably less proud of this place than we were 20 or 30 years ago, sad to say.

Yay-Silicon Valley! Yay-surveillance capitalism!

https://open.substack.com/pub/paulkrugman/p/america-has-become-a-digital-narco?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email

[Smit]

I was reading about this a couple days ago. It's mind blowing to think that they are allowed to make that much cash from scam offerings on their platform. Seriously, WTF.

It's likely the U.S. would be much less messed up if we didn't have the social media we have. But with the money and influence they can buy with that money nothing's going to change. 

Meta internally projected late last year that it would earn about 10% of its overall annual revenue – or $16 billion – from running advertising for scams and banned goods, internal company documents show.

    A cache of previously unreported documents reviewed by Reuters also shows that the social-media giant for at least three years failed to identify and stop an avalanche of ads that exposed Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp's billions of users to fraudulent e-commerce and investment schemes, illegal online casinos, and the sale of banned medical products.

[Brian]

And don't forget the Cambridge Analytica scandal, too:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook%E2%80%93Cambridge_Analytica_data_scandal

What's maddening about all of this is the realization that all of the $$$ incentives align to motivate these companies to maximize user engagement-with little regard for anything else. With little regulation over their actions, and relatively small financial penalties for overstepping what few bounds there are, it's no wonder we get these sorts of results!

[beej]

I was reading about this a couple days ago. It's mind blowing to think that they are allowed to make that much cash from scam offerings on their platform. Seriously, WTF.

It's likely the U.S. would be much less messed up if we didn't have the social media we have. But with the money and influence they can buy with that money nothing's going to change. 

this might be the one thing that you and senator Hawley agree on. There is bi-partisan support against this kind of thing but the money that they have invested in politicians keeps anything from moving forward. Just yesterday, Hawley called out republican leadership for not bringing a bill to the senate floor that got through committee with overwhelming bipartisan agreement.

[neurosis]

There is bi-partisan support against this kind of thing but the money that they have invested in politicians keeps anything from moving forward.

The SCOTUS is geared to make another decision that could sink the US further in to legalized bribery. Not that it isn't bad enough already.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/supreme-court-hears-major-challenge-campaign-spending-limits/story?id=128113121

"As candidates and political parties gear up for the 2026 midterm election campaign, the Supreme Court on Tuesday will consider whether long-standing legal limits on coordinated spending -- enacted to prevent corruption -- violate the First Amendment.

The case was brought by Republican senatorial and congressional campaign committees along with then-Sen. JD Vance and former Rep. Steve Chabot, both Ohio Republicans, against the Federal Election Commission, which is tasked with enforcing the rules.
"

[jstell]

The SCOTUS is geared to make another decision that could sink the US further in to legalized bribery. Not that it isn't bad enough already.

This is just gross.  There needs to be a puke emoji.

[neurosis]

There needs to be a puke emoji.