Thread by @jason_kint

thread: since Facebook PR @andymstone is feinting transparency, please explain whether some stories are are given any benefit of doubt due to an exemption list? I asked your COO Sandberg last year - concerning report Facebook uses Alexa popularity list as proxy for quality. /1

Here was my original Oct 30, 2020 (!!) email to Facebook's team and my list of very simple questions as a follow-up to a Guardian report. They shouldn't be hard to answer, no trade secrets but a pretty simple and important filter for the largest source of news on the planet. /2

Here was my follow-up email to COO Sheryl Sandberg on November 2nd. I'll note that this was immediately prior to the election when Facebook reportedly "broke glass" and increased ranking for high-quality news. /3

Of course, we learned about that process a few weeks later thanks to @kevinroose and colleagues at a high-ranking quality news organization. /4 nytimes.com/2020/11/24/tec…

I don't have an issue with Facebook giving the benefit of the doubt to established, trusted news orgs. It actually makes a lot of sense. But I have deep concern if it includes some sites on the Alexa 500 at the expense of smaller trusted news orgs. Answers helpful. thx. /5

Here is a piece I wrote on this if you want context. It surfaced to me again last week when WSJ reported Facebook had an "exemption list" (xcheck) allowing a large group of sensitive, influential accounts to ironically have less oversight.. ergo power. /6 digitalcontentnext.org/blog/2020/11/1…

Here is the bit from the Guardian report that caused my concerns. The report was of course based on leaked Facebook docs. /7 theguardian.com/technology/202…

thanks. /eof