IndexIntroductionWhat is the film about?AnalysisEffectivenessHow could the film have been improved?ConclusionIntroductionWith a user base of nearly one-third of the world's population, Facebook is the largest social networking platform on the Internet. Guided by the company's manifesto of building a more connected and open world, Facebook connects individuals across the digital space through their online profiles; However, how open is Facebook itself? Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay The documentary Facebookistan attempts to answer this question through the deconstruction of the company's corporate mission, information privacy policies, and content moderation policies. Also examined are Facebook's nebulous transparency policies and the growing tension between Facebook and government institutions, and between activists and their users regarding their activities. What is the film about? Facebookistan begins by introducing the viewer to the ambiguous - and often contradictory - nature of Facebook's activities; in particular, regarding its privacy policies and content moderation practices. This section outlines the struggle of Peter Knudsen, a disenfranchised author who was subjected to Facebook's content moderation practices. The removal of Knudsen's work - which features artistic depictions of nudity - while allegedly allowing pornographic content on the platform demonstrates inconsistencies in Facebook's content policies. Digital activist Rebecca Mackinnon notes that Facebook's platform rules are vague and that their enforcement of these rules is often arbitrary. The viewer is then introduced to Max Schrems, a doctoral student in privacy law who conducts research into Facebook's information privacy practices. Schrems demonstrates the breadth of user information the company holds, which includes data not knowingly shared or previously deleted. He then explains the difficulty in contacting Facebook about these policies; their lack of transparency in this matter constitutes a clear violation of European privacy laws. The documentary then focuses on examining the consequences of Facebook's real name policy in relation to the censorship of cultural groups and the expression of identity in the digital space. Sister Roma, leader of the Drag Queen community, reveals the conflict her community has had with Facebook over these policies. Despite being strongly associated with their Drag characters as a means of cultural expression, Facebook forces members of the community – just like all users – to use their real names on their platform. He then explains Facebook's dishonesty in addressing users' concerns, only to once again force them to use their real names. Mackinnon and other activists argue that Facebook's naming policy endangers the lives of individuals in repressive regimes: the attachment of their real name to unsavory names, political opinions or cultural identities that invite persecution or violence. In response, individuals on the platform censor themselves. The film concludes this chapter by demonstrating its lack of transparency regarding censorship activities. Journalists wishing to contact Facebook on the topic are blocked at every turn by the company's internal bureaucracy. Facebookistan then shifts focus to Facebook's content moderation practices; in particular, the company's arbitrary interpretation of its owncontent rules to satisfy political, cultural or monetary interests. Facebook's positive recruiting messages are directly juxtaposed with the poor working conditions of its moderators, many of whom are often exposed to violent images. Facebook gives its moderators a minimum amount of time to rate content and broad discretion to do so as they see fit in accordance with their rules. Political activists in repressive regimes explain how Facebook often censors their activities in favor of ruling parties. Turkish activist Müge Yamanyilmaz stresses that if individuals want to continue to have a voice on Facebook, they must actively censor themselves: they must adapt to the platform, otherwise they will attract its retaliation. Mackinnon then argues that because Facebook is a vital mode of communication in the digital space, it has a social responsibility to ensure a fair justice system. The system is completely dysfunctional and devoid of accountability. The final segment of Facebookistan focuses on Facebook's data collection activities and relationships with government institutions. Conceptual artist Paolo Cirio describes his experiences with Facebook's unscrupulous sharing of personal information with for-profit partners. He comments on how the content uploaded to Facebook ceases to be the property of the user: it is the property of Facebook and he can do with it what he wants. Max Schrems then presents the viewer with his research into shadow profiles, vast data models made up of all data collected directly or indirectly about the user. The viewer is then presented with alternating accounts of the high acuity of the predictions that can be made with this information, including one's sexual orientation. The film then addresses how Facebook acts to subvert government institutions to gain unrestricted access to citizens' information. This topic is explored through the intimate relationship Facebook has with funding government infrastructure projects and the reluctance of government officials to hold the organization accountable for its actions. Facebook's goal is to achieve a monopoly on citizens' data. Facebookistan ends with an account of a crackdown on Facebook's privacy practices in Europe, suggesting that things may be starting to change. Before analyzing the cultural meaning behind Facebookistan, it is necessary to examine the social context of the work. Over the past decade, the proliferation of mobile devices and social media platforms has had a profound influence on how we communicate and express ourselves. With the push of a button, people can instantly connect with their peers or share their most intimate details in the digital space. This allowed social media users to connect with old acquaintances or network with strangers around shared cultural meaning. Additionally, mobile devices provide the tools to constantly connect with online profiles and social networks. Through this superposition of the digital self onto everyday life, the distinction between public and private space has become irremediably obscured. This, however, was not without consequences. Platform owners wield enormous power in modern society; in particular, with respect to the mediation of cultural forms and the expression of social identity in the digital space. Facebookistan is fundamentally about the nation-state-like influence that social media companies exert on everyday life and the era of technocratic authoritarianism that has emerged from it. Tech companies like Facebook have absolute, often incredibly vague, rules about what content is acceptable on theirsplatforms, the application of which is arbitrary, as it suits their immediate political or economic interests. Furthermore, social media platforms collect large amounts of information about users to do what they want; user consent is dubious at best. To evade accountability to their users, tech companies intentionally obscure their activities through a lack of transparency and bureaucracy. Finally, platform owners actively engage in deception of their users and attempt to subvert government institutions to further their interests. Facebookistan's message is therefore a warning about the authoritarian control that technology companies exercise over everyday life in the digital space. Analysis A defining feature of contemporary society is the expertise in which individuals utilize advances in mobile and computing technologies in tandem with traditional modes of self-performance. The modern media landscape is permeated with messages and symbols, leaving individuals with a skepticism towards information and a mastery of redefining their digital personas in reflection of these evolving cultural artefacts. Driven by the desire for connection and social bonds, individuals make themselves available to the surveillance apparatuses built by social media companies; they feel confident in their comfort in navigating the digital space. Facebookistan provides a popular critique of the oblivion in which people – particularly among those born in the Internet age – surrender to technology companies, in particular, regarding social media platforms. To this end, the documentary aims to persuade the viewer to critically reflect on their own false sense of security in relying on these platforms for their performance. Facebookistan achieves this by illustrating the extent to which social media platforms store user information, the uncanny depth with which predictions about the user can be made with this information, and the possibility that this sensitive data is being used for political or monetary advantage of the platform owner. Furthermore, it also shows the ability of these organizations to censor their own digital self-expression, as they see fit, without any transparency or accountability. Therefore, Facebookistan is fundamentally a critique of the unconsciousness with which contemporary society consumes social media. EffectivenessFacebookistan is effective in its efforts to persuade the public to think about their engagement with social media. In demonstrating the scope in which personal information is collected and the uncanny intimacy with which predictions can be made with this data, the viewer must grapple with the idea that social media platforms probe much deeper into their social life than they were previously aware of. A. More importantly, however, is that they now also need to acknowledge the fact that tech companies know a lot more about them than they are probably willing to share. The illustrative cases analyzed in the film involving Facebook's content moderation activities are particularly disturbing for the viewer; social media companies have amassed enormous power in mediating one's digital self. The viewer comes to understand the extent to which tech companies can censor the performance of their digital identities, as it suits their interests, without any accountability or transparency. Whether viewers fully agree with the film's arguments is irrelevant, as they are forced to reflect on these ideas..