Facebook, Mozilla and Reps

(Rubén Martín) #1

Almost a year ago Mozilla took the decision to pause all official activities on Facebook after the Cambridge Analytica scandal.

During 2018, Facebook scandals kept growing to a obscene level, making a lot of people reflect about it and deleting their presence in this social network.

I personally recently decided that in order to be consequent with my believes I had to delete my personal account there. Doing so I realized that we are still maintaining a few pages and channels about the Reps program there.

Opening this topic to get reactions about this fact and if you think Reps program should also pause all Facebook activity. We are a mirror where a lot of communities look for inspiration and I feel we should set the example.

Cheers.

1 Like
(Daniele Scasciafratte) #2

I don’t think that is the best move because a lot of countries use more Facebook then Twitter and we can lose engagement.

At the same time a lot of communities are still using Facebook for their promotion and if we are part of the representative for mozilla communities I am not sure if it is the best move.

(Rubén Martín) #3

That’s the same situation with Mozilla/Firefox users and we took the decision to pause all engagements there.

For me, having presence in Facebook today is not being serious about our values and saying we are OK with what this organization has been doing to the society and the internet (which is terrible).

If the risk is lower engagement (which we don’t really know because nowadays FB shows content to whoever they want) and the outcome is less people affected/dependent by the Facebook privacy and manipulation threats, then I think it’s a positive move.

If we are not able to lead by example here, nobody else will.

1 Like
(Irvin Chen) #4

However, we’re still using Instagram. It’s not logical to quit FB due to value but feel ok with IG.

I’m thinking maybe we can follow the mozillagram idea, share the account with the local community, let them manage it from time to time. The community can pre-register the date they need for their local event, and use it as promoting tools.

That we can still make good use of the FB page, in a “un-official way” to engage our users remain there.

(Rubén Martín) #5

Are we really able to understand the value our current FB presence has? My point is that even if we have some, the fact we are enabling our users to keep their dependence to this platform is more hurtful that the engagements we could potentially have.

I have to say that my assumption (I have no data) is that the value we are currently getting is low for the program goals and the potential impact on making this statement is high to educate people following us.

(Christophe) #6

Hi,

I do not know if you’re aware, but there is February 28, World Day without Facebook

https://www.journee-mondiale.com/221/journee-mondiale-sans-facebook.htm

Christophe

(Henrik Mitsch) #7

Hi @nukeador,

Thanks for opening the conversation.

I think the Reps Program should become visible on Facebook. Facebook is one of the tools out there which helps discover, investigate, and understand the Reps Program.

A next step could be to measure how much program value (campaign reach, Reps event attendance, Reps applications) is actually derived from this “creating awareness” part of the funnel.

Removing the Reps Program from Facebook is a step in the wrong direction. People can discover Mozilla on Facebook and become educated about the perils that come with such platforms.

Best regards,
Henrik

1 Like
(Gabriela) #8

Hello,

I’m afraid I don’t think it’s a good idea. FB may be the only means of communication with other communities for some small rep’s groups and also the only way to show their activities.

Gabriela
QA Mozilla Hispano Team Responsible

http://www.mozilla-hispano.org

(Rubén Martín) #9

During some time I also shared some of the opinions here about the need to be present in the platform to influence.

I’ve come to realize that this “influence” is an illusion (FB controls what users see) and we can’t really change much if we don’t actively support people to break free out of the platform.

By keeping our presence there we don’t demonstrate we believe anyone can quit and incentive people keep their dependency there because “not even we really care that much”.

Pausing our official presence there as a program, as Mozilla has done last year, I think is consequent with rest the of the org and helps us educate people we are serious about this threat.

Cheers.

1 Like
(Ranjith Raj) #10

Proud to know that our official presence is no more on Facebook(hope the same for Instagram)

I strongly agree with @nukeador on points that

Facebook’s revenue model is surveillance capitalism, and surveillance capitalism is against Mozilla’s Manifesto, with no doubt.

Quitting Surveillance platforms is one part, it will complete by starting our official and active presence of privacy/decentralized platforms like “https://fediverse.network”. It’s our responsibility to educate our networks with privacy-centric alternatives.

(Sierra) #11

Hi Everyone,

When Mozilla made this decision, it was a company decision to not spend money on the platforms. Let me be clear as we still have active profiles on other Facebook-owned properties (see Mozilla & Firefox on Instagram). We support the communities and individuals in their decisions to do what is best for them. Thus, if it is best for your community to maintain a presence on Facebook-owned properties that is your decision.

1 Like
(Rubén Martín) #12

But Facebook profiles are still on pause, right?

(Sierra) #13

Correct.

Facebook is still paused for Mozilla and Firefox.