“All my research is on things that social media platforms can do to make things better,” said David Rand, an MIT professor and one of Trump’s vaccine writers who is testing the effectiveness of praising vaccines. “But I think TVs and radios, especially Rs-serv TVs and radios, are essentially getting free passes despite the current indefinite damage.”

The Biden administration’s criticism of Facebook is a double whammy for Fox News. It not only draws attention to the network’s own fault for the vaccination gap, but it also feeds a powerful right-wing story about the government and big tech to keep government officials silent. “I think this kind of coordination between a big government and a big monopoly corporation, boy, is scary. And that’s really censorship, “Missouri Senator Josh Howley said Thursday.” Where else? ” – Fox News. This spirit of aggression easily sustained the Rs. , Everything we were afraid they would do. “

It’s easy to see why the White House will spend political capital on Facebook instead of fax news: Facebook can really listen. Biden has no advantage over right-wing media. When Fox News Host questions the safety or wisdom of vaccination, there is no flaw in its implementation; That’s tonight’s programming. Many people on Facebook, by contrast, would choose not to be responsible for spreading toxins in America’s public health information environment.

Which, according to Facebook, they are not. In a blog post last week, Guy Rose, Facebook’s vice president of integrity, argued that Facebook is a force for good when it comes to vaccinations. He noted that “more than 2 billion people have seen official information about Covid-19 and vaccines on Facebook” since the epidemic began, while the company has “removed more than 18 million instances of Covid-19 misinformation.” And, he claimed, Facebook has complied with all eight of the Surgeon General’s recommendations – including the statue’s suggestion that companies “give researchers access to useful data to properly disseminate misinformation and analyze its impact.”

In fact, Facebook infamously does not provide access to the data needed to understand what is happening on its platform. Note, for example, that Rosen’s blog post does not mention how often users have seen unreliable information about Kovid or the vaccine. Facebook reveals statistics about engagement with posts – likes, shares and so much more – but refuses to disclose data about “reach”, i.e. how many people view part of the content. Nor does it provide any concrete details about its efforts to reduce the spread of misinformation.

“The public has no idea what Facebook is or is doing to combat vaccine misinformation, and has no idea how bad or bad the problem is,” said Rand Rand, a professor at MIT. “A lot of work is being done in the company by a lot of smart people to try to reduce the impact of misinformation, but they don’t really say much about it.”

Rand said that platforms like Facebook are partnering with researchers outside of laboratory studies on what vaccines do and doesn’t do to combat misinformation. He noted that Facebook is sitting on enough data to measure how exposure to posts about vaccines affects real-world behaviors. “They’re doing randomized controlled trials every day on vaccine misinformation, they just don’t think that way,” he said.

The irony is that, by providing Some It seems to have strayed into the worst possible balance between insight, Facebook transparency and privacy on how to approach the problem. YouTube makes relatively little information available to researchers, despite its great importance helping to fly under political and regulatory radar. Facebook provides researchers and journalists with enough data through CrowdTangle to build the company – but then hides the evidence that it claims to be the opposite.