Today’s Edition: Disinformation for profit.

July 23, 2021

          The world’s wealthiest nation has a surplus of vaccine but faces a new wave of coronavirus deaths because a substantial portion of its population does not trust science, doctors, or vaccines. How did we get here? The answer to that question is far beyond the scope of today’s newsletter, but we can identify one cause (among many): Facebook. The algorithms used by Facebook inexorably drive users to increasingly baseless and conspiratorial information. Why? To maximize revenue. To be clear, Facebook could make it otherwise, but that would reduce clicks, decrease revenue, and require Facebook to do the hard work of ensuring that its monopoly power is not used to promote disinformation.

          Although Facebook has advisory boards, activist shareholders, and a code of ethics, the laissez faire attitude toward disinformation reflects the personal philosophy of Mark Zuckerberg, a man who is spectacularly unqualified to make sweeping societal judgments about the limits of disinformation for profit. Zuckerberg has said it is okay for politicians to lie in Facebook ads, defended the right of Holocaust deniers to post on Facebook, and told Congress that Facebook won’t try to stop anti-vaxxers from posting their views on the platform. (Facebook ultimately reversed Zuckerberg’s initial judgments on each of these issues.) Of course, it would be impermissible for the government to censor speech on those topics. That is not the case with Facebook, which generates revenue by preferentially directing users to vile, baseless, and dangerous theories posted on the platform.

          The insidious nature of Facebook’s disinformation algorithm is the subject of a blog by Judd Legum, in Popular Information, “Lies, damn lies, and Facebook's statistics.” Legum’s blog is always thoughtful, well-written, and deeply researched. If you aren’t a regular reader of Popular Information, you should consider becoming one. Legum’s post about Facebook lays bare the perverse relationship between disinformation and Facebook’s profitability. Facebook claimed three months ago it had removed the twelve worst anti-vax offenders on the platform. After Facebook’s claim that it cleaned up its act, ten of the twelve remained active on Facebook. See MSN, “Facebook says it removed the internet's 12 most prominent anti-vaxxers. 10 are still on the social network.”

          Legum refers to a study by NewsGaurd, which confirms that Facebook is giving lip service to fighting vaccine disinformation even though such disinformation flourishes on the platform. Per Legum,

          According to NewsGuard, Facebook is “still programming its algorithms to send users down rabbit holes of anti-vax propaganda.” Specifically, “Facebook continues to recommend broad networks of anti-vaccine and health misinformation pages to users.”

          The power of Facebook’s disinformation algorithm was demonstrated by a NewsGuard analyst, who conducted an experiment on July 20 (as in three days ago): He “liked” a single anti-vaccine post. Ten minutes later (and a few more clicks) and the analyst was presented with “dozens of pages publishing vaccine and COVID-19 misinformation, many with thousands of followers." The entire process took less than 10 minutes.”

          Once you show a slight interest in a rabbit hole on Facebook, the algorithms try to drive you as deeply into that hole as possible to maximize clicks and revenue. And from the bottom of that rabbit hole, the entire universe appears to be telling you to distrust vaccines, or the government, or elections. Tens of thousands of Americans may die in the coming months because they believed malicious anti-vaccination propaganda that increased Facebook’s revenue. See PBS, “As more Americans get vaccinated, 41% of Republicans still refuse COVID-19 shots.”

          Facebook does not deserve all of the blame, but it is uniquely positioned to lead the way to a future in which hoaxers, charlatans, and quacks are relegated to the shadowy corners of the internet—rather than appearing at the top of your newsfeed. And if Facebook (and other social media giants) can’t find the courage to act, they may lose their congressionally granted protection from liability. See Vox, “Amy Klobuchar’s new bill would repeal some Section 230 protections for tech companies.” (The legislation “aims to finally hold tech companies responsible for allowing misinformation about vaccines and other health issues to spread online.”) Let’s hope they act soon, before more Americans lose their lives.

Joe Biden’s town hall on Wednesday.

          Joe Biden held a town hall meeting on Wednesday that was televised by CNN. It was an uneven performance by Biden, marred by careless misstatements. See FactCheck.org, “Fact Checking Biden’s CNN Town Hall.” Biden used the occasion to defend the filibuster, saying that repeal of the filibuster would result in “chaos” in Congress and “nothing would get done.” His comments on the filibuster were ill-conceived and demonstrably wrong. I was prepared to deconstruct those comments in today’s newsletter but have changed my mind. Why? Because the news from the town hall lasted all of two hours. One day after the event, there is simply no discussion of Biden’s comments anywhere in major media outlets, so there is little point in discussing comments that everyone in Washington seems to have discounted or dismissed.

          The more worrisome question is why a prime-time event by Biden was roundly ignored. I am a fan of Biden and make it a point to listen to his speeches and post-speech interactions with the press. He is generally very good, but the media tends to report only his gaffes. Wednesday’s event was a swing-and-a-miss on every level. I hope that his advisers are reflecting on how Biden can be more effective in reaching the American people. Those advisers can cross “town halls” off the list. Perhaps they should consult with the people over at the Lincoln Project on effective messaging. And I mean that in the sincerest way possible. I am rooting for Joe. His success will benefit all Americans.

Biden to campaign in Virginia

          President Biden will make a trip to Virginia to campaign on behalf of Democratic Governor Terry McAuliffe. See WaPo, “Biden will launch into campaigning with visit to Virginia in support of McAuliffe.” Biden’s first campaign trip comes at an important time for Virginia and for Democrats nationally. In November 2021 (this year!), all statewide offices in Virginia will be up for election—including the governorship and every seat in the assembly. A strong showing in Virginia by Democrats in 2021 will be a bellwether for the 2022 midterms. Democratic Governor candidate Terry McAuliffe is facing a strong challenge and Republicans have made it a priority to flip the Virginia legislature.            Democrats took control of the Virginia legislature in 2019 for the first time in two decades, a change fueled by anger against Trump. It would be devastating to lose that advantage after only one election cycle.

          A reader sent a list of ways in which Democrats across the nation can help keep Virginia blue. Here is a partial list:

• Donate directly to Terry McAuliffe’s campaign here.

• Donate to five Democratic challengers for the VA House of Delegates identified by 31st Street Swing Left, a grassroots group dedicated to winning state legislatures, here.

• Donate to 10 competitive races in the House of Delegates and the governor’s race via Swing Left, here. Call VA voters, support local organizations and more via Swing Left, here.

• Send letters to encourage voters from underrepresented communities and Democratic-leaning registered voters to request their absentee ballots in advance of the November election via Vote Forward, here.

• If you live in the VA area, volunteer to canvass with a group such as  31st Street Swing Left, NOPE (Neighbors Defending Democracy), or the Virginia Turnout Project of the VA Democratic Party. Or volunteer to register voters via Arlington Democrats, here.

The urgency of Supreme Court reform and ending the filibuster.

          Well, it has finally happened. A state attorney generally has asked the Supreme Court to overrule Roe v. Wade (and related cases). Mississippi passed an abortion ban that is impermissible under Roe v. Wade. It did so for the express purpose of asking the Court to overrule Roe v. Wade. Mississippi lost in federal district court and in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court granted review of the lower court ruling. Mississippi claims that the Court must overrule Roe v. Wade if it upholds Mississippi’s statute. See The Hill, “Mississippi's attorney general asks Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade.” A decision in the case is expected in the summer of 2022—before the midterm elections.

          Mississippi’s request is a naked admission that the Court is not an objective, non-partisan body, but rather, an extension of the Republican minority in America. Mississippi’s request is predicated on the fact that Republicans have packed the Court with anti-choice jurists who seek to promote a conservative religious agenda. Democrats currently have it within their power to expand the Court, but only if the Senate limits or abolishes the filibuster. We may not have this same configuration of Congress and the presidency for decades. The time to act is now.

          On a related note, it turns out that the FBI investigated only a fraction of the tips it received regarding Justice Kavanaugh’s unfitness to serve on the Court. The FBI turned over most of the tips to the White House, which was running the campaign to confirm Kavanaugh. See NYTimes, “Details on F.B.I. Inquiry Into Kavanaugh Draw Fire From Democrats.” The procedure followed by the FBI was unusual and inappropriate. But neither FBI Director Wray nor Attorney General Garland seemed bothered by this lapse into partisan interference by the FBI to help the confirmation of Justice Kavanaugh.

Concluding Thoughts.

In response to yesterday’s newsletter, a reader sent a quote by Ben Hecht, “Trying to determine what is going on in the world by reading newspapers is like trying to tell the time by watching the second hand of a clock.” To be clear, reading newspapers can be a good thing. But Hecht’s point is about perspective. The granularity and ephemeral nature of many stories make it difficult to determine what is important. An apocryphal story about Chou En-lai (or Zhou Enlai ) (Premier of the People’s Republic of China) makes this same point, albeit in an exaggerated way. In the 1970s, a reporter allegedly asked Chou what he thought about the impact of the French Revolution. Chou replied, “It’s too soon to tell.”

          We are living in a high-velocity cultural war being fought on social media, in digital news media, and in state and federal legislatures. Making sense of daily events is difficult. Here’s my suggestion: You have made it this far in life by trusting your judgment about the state of the world. You may have made mistakes, but in general, you have succeeded in distinguishing truth from lies, decency from depravity, and good people from bad. If you feel overwhelmed or lost, step back and try to take the long view of events and trust your instincts. Will today’s political events really make a difference in ten years? Twenty? And if so, how? We cannot allow ourselves to get stuck in social media rabbit hole that smothers our ability to reason. Whatever happens in the next five weeks in Congress, American democracy will not only endure, it will thrive. The path may be arduous and circuitous, but it is the outcome that matters.

          Enjoy the weekend. Take some time to regain perspective. Talk to you on Monday!