1/ I am enraged. Excellent reporting from WSJ's @dseetharaman and @EmilyGlazer finds that Facebook engineers—with sign-off from Zuckerberg himself—retooled their algorithm to throttle traffic to high-value progressive news orgs, @MotherJones IN PARTICULAR wsj.com/articles/how-m…
2/ Last year, @MonikaBauerlein and I wrote about how Facebook's changes to its algorithm hurt legit news orgs as it pumped right-wing disinfo machines. We used the impact on our traffic as an example: motherjones.com/politics/2019/…
BUT
3/ We did NOT know that they were targeting us in particular.
We suspected, and has since been shown in this WSJ piece and elsewhere, that they made these changes b/c conservatives had worked the refs. ITS SO MUCH WORSE.
4/ It's not an unintentional by product of ref-working. It's an INTENTIONAL change to hurt shops that do serious investigative journalism, so as to boost traffic to things like:
5/ Zuckerberg had Ben Shapiro over to dinner to court him? WTF, seriously? Guess who's not invited to dinner? Hey Mark, I only live a few blocks from you. wsj.com/articles/how-m…
6/ What did these changes in algorithm mean to @MotherJones? Someting like $400,000 to $600,000 a year. That's big for a news org our size.
This year, we've done everything we can to not lay people off. But it's meant pay cuts for our higher paid employees, loss of 401K match.
7/ Over the years, Facebook has bribed, essentially, big news orgs to pivot to video, only to be caught inflating the revenue estimates, and costing huge layoffs at some places.
Facebook is a garbage company.
8/ Facebook a) pumps disinfo over real news b) works in concert with some of the absolute worst actors on the Right c) didn't see the horrific results of livestreaming massacres coming.
It is a toxic cesspool and directly implicated in everything tearing our country apart.
9/ They're doing all this INTENTIONALLY. It's not a mistake. It's not blinders. It's purposeful.
10/ Now as it happens, this is our annual fundraising drive time. We rely on readers to give to support our journalism. Because of Facebook, that support is even more crucial. @MonikaBauerlein wrote a lovely piece about our priorities at this key time: motherjones.com/media/2020/10/…
11/ So if you'd like to contribute a little bit toward the hole that Facebook intentionally created just for us, I'd be super appreciative. And VOTE: secure.motherjones.com/flex/mj/key/7M…
12/ AND they directly lied to our social media team. Facebook is a garbage company. You work there, you're complicit in the Pandora's Box of shit they've let loose on the world.
13/ Just heard from some folks inside/formerly of Facebook. It's even worse than what I just laid out. If you want to talk, hmu at cjeffery on Signal or DM me here.
14/ @bendreyfuss, head of MoJo's social media team, wrote about what it means to be lied to (perhaps b/c they're unwittingly passing along lies of their bosses) by FB counterparts. But per what I'm learning, FB just lied to him, again, here: motherjones.com/media/2020/10/…
15/ SCOOP: Facebook ran experiments on an algorithm change in Jan 2018 and when it hurt traffic to right-wing opinion sites, they retooled it to shift harm to progressive NEWS sites, @MotherJones among them.
16/ This revamp of the algorithm came at the behest of Joel Kaplan and other Republican lobbyists at Facebook: motherjones.com/media/2020/10/…
17/ The original intent of the algorithm change was to dial down incendiary pieces (and comments) in your feed. But when doing that harmed conservative sites, they freaked out: motherjones.com/media/2020/10/…
19/ One source recalls charts for impacts on about a dozen publishers. Who else was named in the deck? And who else was impacted beyond that dozen? News companies, esp for-profit/VC-funded, are reticent to talk about traffic falling, but a lot more digging to be done.
20/ Upshot: Facebook used its monopolistic power to boost and suppress specific publishers’ content, something Facebook and other companies have been strenuously denying for years. And they did it for internal partisan reasons. motherjones.com/media/2020/10/…
21/ Takeaway: Conservatives have been so good at working the refs at Facebook that not only is the company unwilling to rein in activity that contributed to the climate they didn't want, they went out of their way to harm progressive news orgs instead. motherjones.com/media/2020/10/…
22/ So the next time Conservatives cry about "shadow banning" or "bias," just remember that, so far at least, they've *benefited* from Facebook's lobbyists running interference with the product team. Hurt was us, and who knows how many other news orgs? motherjones.com/media/2020/10/…
21/ In conclusion, please send me or the media reporter of your choosing this deck.
22/ Please pay special attention to this non-denial denial from Facebook spox @andymstone
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1/ Whether or not Biden explicitly endorses Harris, it's hard to imagine who would a) decide to go up against her and b) wind up on top with the amount of time left.
Maybe a year ago or even six months ago. But now?
2/ Biden cannot make his delegates vote for Harris. Sure, if he was like "imho, she's the only one for the job" they'd be *even more* likely to go for her. But they're not legally bound to follow his lead.
To many, this signals chaos ahead. But another way to think about it...
3/ Is that a process that wasn't kicked off by Biden being super explicit about his wishes would still likely wind up with Harris, but with less worry that voters would feel they were forced to supporters.
1/ Today we began to roll out an incredible 2.5 year project with @reveal and @publicintegrity. We found 1250 formerly enslaved people who WERE given the 40 Acres Gen Sherman promised them, only to have it seized back after Lincoln was killed motherjones.com/politics/2024/…
2/ It began when @AlexiaCampbell found some documents deep in the US Archives…
@AlexiaCampbell 3/ Years of document dives, many reporting trips, and a giant database build later, @publicintegrity reporters not only found land titles given to 1,250 emancipated people (there are likely thousands more) but traced the geneology of many: motherjones.com/politics/2024/…
1/For years, the mother of mass shooter Elliot Rogers has been quietly helping experts prevent future massacres. For the past two years, she's been talking to @markfollman. This is an important story, unlike any other: motherjones.com/criminal-justi…
2/ Family, friends, the many therapists he saw—they all knew he struggled. But nobody thought he was suicidal, much less murderous. How can we all learn from missed signals, and ensure that our communities have threat assessment teams to flag and help divert potential killers?
3/ Elliot Roger is especially infamous b/c left behind misogynistic rants. But the media label of “intel ringleader,” say the experts who’ve studied him for 10 years, is skewed, and it’s help fuel copycat cases. And this is important, generally, because...
1/ Jesus, Blue Wave twitter has, yet again, completely lost its mind re @maggieNYT. Guys, texting with sources is how you get the inside dope and "start writing" isn't an order from Trump HQ, it's like, start your process and I'll maybe feed you something.
2/ Does a reporter coax info out of someone by...coaxing, yes, yes they do. It's a game of cat and mouse where each side hopes to get something from the other. The journalist: info. The source: sympathy/spin/down payment on future leakage, etc.
3/ In a case like this the source and the journo have known each other for years, maybe decades. They are each doing a dance to get what they want. Nobody in this case is a media naif.
1/ Today, we launched a giant project on American Oligarchy.
From the rise of Trump, to crippling housing prices, to reality TV, there's nothing that explains America's crises like seemingly limitless power (and oft farcical vanity) of the super rich: motherjones.com/politics/2024/…
2/ First, a quick video preview of what a full issue of @MotherJones magazine, plus a lot more online, holds: tiktok.com/@motherjonesma…
1/ Sure seems like big news orgs should update their "what we know and don't know" stories about the bombing at the hospital to mention in the first graph that the hospital itself was not hit or even sustained much damage! npr.org/2023/10/18/120…
2/ NPR doesn't have a transcript up yet but listen to this 3-min piece that's a good rundown of the whole situation npr.org/2023/10/19/120…
3/ The cynic in me thinks news orgs that were too hasty in their assessments are now hiding behind language like the bombing "at" the hospital. (Rather than "of.")