Ideal Facebook

Facebook could actually become a good shopping channel if the company finally hired some talent and stopped buggering around with useless features.

Right now, FB’s ad algorithms are so pathetic that it’s ridiculous. With all the information they have, it’s a crime against the gods of marketing to offer somebody like me T-shirts for men saying “My wife is a pain in the ass but she’s my pain in the ass” and bras for the very flat-chested with a slogan “finally there’s proof that an A cup can look sexy.” I’m sure there’s a flat-chested woman somewhere who’d be happy to see this ad but instead she’s staring at ads that feature bras one could use as a circus tent or to trap a whale and that I’d be buying in bulk the second I saw them.

My ideal Facebook is the one where I see friends’ birthdays and pictures of their kids plus tons of good shopping offers. Instead they offer me endless ads of precooked frozen soups, which is a product I consider to be an affront to my basic humanity.

And I’m supposed to believe that idiots whose algorithms are so bad they can’t figure out that a person who posts on behalf of United Feminists will not buy sexist T-shirts can sell me a political opinion I don’t already hold?

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Ideal Facebook”

  1. I don’t understand the pearl clutching over facebook myself. Facebook sells/provides communication. And it does it well. It’s a great way for me to stay in touch with my family, share and see pictures with loved ones who are far away, and feel up to date with loved ones who live far away. And ANY communication tool can be used for nefarious purposes: phones, letters, telegrams. If FB was somehow tampering with voting machines, that would be cause for concern. But a bunch of yahoos sharing their silly conspiracy theories that they believed anyway? I don’t see how FB is responsible for their users sharing and reposting ridiculous content.

    And truly, I don’t even see those types of “fake news” items across my feed. My friend group is small and mostly well read. The only things that I see shared are articles from legitimate new outlets: NYT, WaPo, CNN, etc. etc. The people who do share “fake news” items already believe a bunch of ridiculous conspiracy theories: flat earthers, creationists, gun cultists. They are just sharing the crap they already believe with their friend group who harbor similarly insane belifes.

    I do think the American people need to be better trained on how to recognize illegitimate new sources. The amount of students who have started to question whether or not the NYT is a legitimate new source has become troubling. But I do think most Freshman English classes train students on how to recognize and classify sources.

    Like

    1. Yesterday, some website offered me a video on how Hillary created this huge conspiracy to destroy the world. I watched the video from beginning to end because I wanted to find out what some people are getting exposed to. All I can say is that the only way this video could have any impact on me is if I already wanted to believe the insane things it was saying. So yes, exactly, if you are already predisposed to believe it, then you would. But otherwise, I can’t understand how it could have any impact. To me it’s more “hey, Hillary must have been doing something right to get these idiots so worried about her.” Because that’s what I already was pre-disposed to believe. đŸ™‚

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s