Liberal groups strike back at Facebook
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/liberal-groups-strike-back-at-facebook-91002.htmlProgressive and environmental groups are declaring open warfare against Facebook, escalating their frustration over pro-oil, anti-Obamacare ads being sponsored by Mark Zuckerbergs immigration reform campaign.
A coalition of activist organizations including MoveOn.org, the Sierra Club, the League of Conservation Voters and Progressives United said Tuesday they will suspend their paid Facebook advertising for at least two weeks.
Leaders in the technology community have every right to talk about how immigration reform will benefit their businesses, former Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.), who founded Progressives United, said in a statement. But instead, FWD.us has chosen a strategy thats condescending to voters and counterproductive to the cause of reform.
Each organization has committed to pulling their existing ads or holding off on the purchase of new ads for at least two weeks, and some groups are considering doing so for longer, Progressives United spokesman Josh Orton said.
The temporary ad boycott is the latest widening in an already ugly rift between Zuckerberg's advocacy group, FWD.us, and liberal organizations that share the same goal of reforming U.S. immigration policy.
MADem
(135,425 posts)I think he's even more of an asshole than portrayed in that Facebook film.
marble falls
(57,067 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)mikeysnot
(4,756 posts)Don't use it, don't want ti, made a page for my band and had to set up a profile just to do a band page, waste of fucking time.
For the first two years I had no friends, so when I commented on sites that use fb login where they want your friends and likes, i was like sure... have at it...
silverweb
(16,402 posts)[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]You're probably already aware, but on the off chance you're not, Justin Timberlake bought MySpace and it's pretty much oriented solely towards musicians and their fans.
mikeysnot
(4,756 posts)but that is good to know. I noticed that that FB references myspace for musicians.
When did Murdock sell?
silverweb
(16,402 posts)[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]Wikipedia's got a good article on the history of the site, past and current.
Facebook overtook MySpace about the time you left. It had gotten slow and awkward, burdened with too much multimedia and not enough capacity to handle it. I left in 2005 or 2006, as soon as I learned Murdoch had bought it.
Timberlake says he's got lots of ideas to revitalize it and I'd love to see him succeed. I do think, though, that he's got to broaden the appeal again to more than a primarily music industry focus. He's also got to make sure that he's got the server capacity to handle the heavy multimedia load and make it user friendly. Slow and awkward just doesn't cut it these days.
mikeysnot
(4,756 posts)I hope JT didn't spend too much for it...
silverweb
(16,402 posts)[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]I think he has other investors involved, but whatever he paid for it, he seems to think it's worth it.
It's his new pet project and you might find it a good place to market your band.
MADem
(135,425 posts)I think he may have gotten a bargain.
They_Live
(3,231 posts)if it was called Fuckfacebook. And if Zuckerberg wasn't such a prick.
navarth
(5,927 posts)I joined some time ago because my business partner at the time felt it was good to have a presence there. What a cluster fuck. After my 100th argument with a 100th random acquaintance that turned out to be a clueless teabagger, I decided to not go anymore.
I don't miss it at all.
My 2 cents
Zeteticus
(23 posts)Left FB for awhile then went back. I am now more stupider (see!!!!). I closed my account and am now recovering again.
Skittles
(153,142 posts)exactly how lazy are they?
SharonAnn
(13,772 posts)and friends in the Far East. Facebook allows me periodic "contacts" with them, news snippets about things they're doing, etc. For that, I like it. There's no way I could keep in touch with all of them.
Skittles
(153,142 posts)as a GI brat, I grew up doing that
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)of databases & computer networks. Except for the very few, very savvy nerds that are on FB just to fuck with it, it's fans are in for even more hard lessons in why it's important to remain anonymous on the web and internet.
rurallib
(62,406 posts)they sure seem to favor republicans - maybe I am too sensitive.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)blackspade
(10,056 posts)savannah43
(575 posts)"Sit on My Facebook."
jeff47
(26,549 posts)RedstDem
(1,239 posts)i know that will never happen, the CIA for one has too much invested, but that would be a good day.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)I've set up an account years ago, first thing they did was to sell my cellphone number to Ralph Reed and get me charged for their BS anti-abortion texts. So I had to forbid my carrier from taking texts from anyone.
Then they rummaged through my email address book and sent requests to me from people who hadn't asked, and mine to them.
And some people felt violated, since we'd only connected by screen names and they didn't know who was sending them invitations.
I wish I knew how to definitely close the damn thing down, but I'm told it's almost impossible. So it's been sitting there for years after I logged out and never returned, getting god-only-knows posted on it. I
got porn on my wall by some weirdo who contacted me at my email addy from there, when I'd set everything to private. Setting the FB email to spam didn't stop requests in my email, either.
Anyone know how to get away from it? TIA.
Oh, and Zuckerberg is on my list as one of the worst POS there is.
Bernardo de La Paz
(48,988 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)progree
(10,901 posts)I have two psedo-accounts (neither using my real name and identity) on Facebook ... with one I gave my land-line phone number and with the other my cellphone number. I created them more than two years ago.
I haven't had any cellphone spam problems or any noticable increase of landline calls. And no problems with junk email either to my Facebook email accounts or any noticable increase to my regular email accounts (they have a different regular email for each account).
As for why I bother with Facebook - GRRRRRR -- two advocacy organizations that I am active in have most of their activity on Facebook. It's "where it's at" for these two organizations, unfortunately, and the only equivalent of a message board for these organizations.
I limit my Facebook postings to these 2 groups. I've deliberately limited friendships to zero in one account and two for the other. (I've also found that I needed two friends in order to be able to post comments on some local news sites like twincities.com (St. Paul Pioneer Press) that use the Facebook commenting system (GRRRRR to them requiring Facebook accounts in order to comment on their sites).
Oh, sometimes I look at other organizations and events on Facebook and have found that I have to be a Facebook member to access some of these (and often these don't have web sites or don't keep their websites updated). In other words, too often an organization's web presence is for all practical purposes its Facebook page.
Good luck!
Dawson Leery
(19,348 posts)Duval
(4,280 posts)I have thoroughly enjoyed my Facebook family and friends. I have also enjoyed playing some of the games. I have never seen anything on my wall that was ugly or suggestive, but 98% of my friends are liberal, as am I. I've set up my account so that only friends can view it. No one has to put up with "crap" on Facebook. Set your parameters, everyone, and just have "friends" there.
JNelson6563
(28,151 posts)that was run by progressives.
Julie
michigandem58
(1,044 posts)I've got a lot of important family that I otherwise would have far less contact with. I can't herd them all to another site, and I'm not giving that up.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)defacto7
(13,485 posts)That would teach them!
I never had one, never will, never liked it. I've always thought of it as cancer.
farmbo
(3,121 posts)Two self-righteous, poor little rich boys who think their wealth entitles them to run the world.
One just has better hair.
Dsolender
(1 post)I don't think its necessary to reject facebook because the owner is pro oil. Don't get me wrong, I'm as bleeding heart as the next guy, but just because one person is a conservative doesn't mean the entire company and its product are. Chic Filet a may have a bigot, homophobic, uneducated owner, but thats no reason not to eat at chic fil a. (The reason not to eat at chic fil a is cause its disgusting fast food from a big corporation that doesn't care as much about the consumer as it does about profits) Plus, just because Zuckerberg is making more or less money, does not mean he will necessarily be spending more or less on lobbying. Also, has anyone stopped to see what OTHER political views. I for one am a moderate democrat who believes drugs and alcohol are bad, social security and welfare need nonpartisan reform, Raising taxes does not do long term benefit to the economy. AM I AN EVIL SON OF A BITCH!?
TeamPooka
(24,218 posts)Response to Dsolender (Reply #37)
mokawanis This message was self-deleted by its author.
They_Live
(3,231 posts)by never joining up with their data mining operation.
Start a liberal social network site, so liberal and activist groups can coordinate without having to use zuckerbergs services. For the amount of money you are (probably) handing zuckerberg, you could easily run web hosting and not have to put up with his politics any more. AND have a far more effective method to communicate with your base.