The title is editorialized and ought to be changed. He's referring to "fake news", not to the internet broadly.

It still puts a sinking feeling in my stomach. In-fact, maybe even moreso. I can't believe how much and how fast things have changed in 12 years.

Misleading headline. Read the article before commenting.

Goldberg: Is this new malevolent information architecture bending the moral arc away from justice?

Obama: I think it is the single biggest threat to our democracy.

This is the quote. He is talking about disinformation. He didn't say it in the context of "the Internet".

Kind of ironic in the end.

Hot take: subtle differences in algorithm choices have huge real-world implications. Facebook prioritizes engagement as their top metric. This means that divisive content which inspires strong emotions bubbles to the top of the feed. This has predictable consequences for discussions and communities.

Reddit prioritizes using user votes, which tends to result in less divisive content. But the way the community is broken down into subreddits can result in clear echo chambers at times as people reinforce each other's behaviors.

In case you didn't guess right away, yes, the title is editorialized. The content seems fine, though.

The editorialized title should be flagged.

Sorry Barack, but I think you mean: “Advertising models on the internet are the biggest threat to our democracy”

The internet, if anything has promoted democratic practice around the world, which is why China wants to shut it out. It has done more for knowledge sharing than any medium in history.

Unfortunately, advertising is one of the the only model big enough to sustain the purchase of massive amounts of hardware which grow the internet, that and movie subscriptions.

But it will die as a model in the next decade I’m sure. When the AI overlords take over, there will be no need for money.

so is fox news spreading blatant lies or theories without evidence , so not only internet, but tv, radio or any other broadcasting thing.

"The point is – imagine a country full of bioweapon labs, where people toil day and night to invent new infectious agents. The existence of these labs, and their right to throw whatever they develop in the water supply is protected by law. And the country is also linked by the world’s most perfect mass transit system that every single person uses every day, so that any new pathogen can spread to the entire country instantaneously. You’d expect things to start going bad for that city pretty quickly.

"Well, we have about a zillion think tanks researching new and better forms of propaganda. And we have constitutionally protected freedom of speech. And we have the Internet. So we’re kind of screwed."

https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/

Turning Libya into a country where they sell slaves in broad daylight was needed to keep his democracy alive, I guess.

It has turned people so antisocial >.<

This post should be flagged for disinformation.

Focusing on a negative. Yes the internet can be exploited but the internet means communication between all people in the world.

That has never happened before in history.

I believe that you don't have to bomb a country to free its people. Simply show them that there is a better way and the people will eventually demand change.

This is what the internet is doing. It's showing people women who vote, gays who celebrate their freedom, free health care and education for all, safety, security. Fundamentally that is what all humans want.

But I guess it also becomes harder to oppress one remote culture, and use them for cheap labor, if they can see where their labor is going and what it's worth through their cellphone.