Facebook exec says right-wing drives more engagement because its “populism is always more engaging” as it speaks to “an incredibly strong, primitive emotion”

Politico 2020-09-28 Alex Thompson

Context & Ripple Effects

This Politico report captures a rare internal admission: a Facebook executive acknowledging that right-wing content outperforms because its "populism is always more engaging," speaking to what he calls "an incredibly strong, primitive emotion." That framing matters because it comes from inside the company whose ranking systems decide what gets amplified.

The admission lands on an existing evidentiary trail. Researchers already found far-right publishers get 65% more engagement when they publish fake news while liberal and centrist outlets are penalized for the same behavior (a Wired-cited study), and EU politicians later blamed Facebook's 2019 algorithm changes for deepening polarization, particularly in Poland (per documents reported by the Washington Post). An exec now describing that dynamic as inherent to populist content shifts the question from "is the algorithm biased?" to "does the business model reward it?"

First-order effects

Facebook's own leadership has now framed engagement-maximizing design as structurally favoring right-wing populism — handing regulators and critics a direct quote that the platform's incentives, not user demand alone, drive the imbalance.

Second-order effects

European scrutiny intensifies: politicians who already tied Facebook's 2019 algorithm changes to polarization in Poland gain an internal confirmation to cite, pressuring the company's EU-facing policy and product decisions.

Third-order effects

If engagement-optimization reliably rewards emotive populist content, political influence on the platform keeps migrating away from journalistic brands toward activist-run pages — a shift visible since at least 2016, when such pages first rivaled MSNBC and the New York Times in reach without any editorial standard (NYT reporting).

The trend: Platform economics built on engagement are converging with political polarization research to make content-ranking design — not just content moderation — the central regulatory battleground for social networks.

Discussion

@alxthomp Alex Thompson on x
NEW: Why are right-wing FB pages so popular? A Facebook exec argues the msg is just more visceral: “Right wing populism is always more engaging...Nation, protection, the other, anger, fear. That was there in the 30s. That's not invented by social media” https://www.politico.com/.…
@donie Donie O'Sullivan on x
Facebook is “biased against facts,” @mariaressa tells @brianstelter. “I worry that you can't have integrity of elections if you don't have integrity of facts and right now you don't have that.” https://twitter.com/...
@advodude Adam Mordecai on x
I'm old enough to remember when Facebook had to change it's algorithm bc @upworthy was dominating the platform and they cut us off at the knees overnight. They have a selective ideology memory. https://twitter.com/...
@carolecadwalla Carole Cadwalladr on x
Absolutely spot on from both @mariaressa & @brianstelter. ‘We have to hold the line. We have to hold the line. It is not a partisan issue to defend democracy’ @mariaressa more than anyone knows what's at stake https://twitter.com/...
@moonalice Roger McNamee on x
Whether by accident or design, unnamed FB exec confirms what critics have been saying: FB algos amplify optimized for fear, outrage. Hate, disinfo, conspiracy theories trigger flight or fight, which cannot be ignored. Structural advantage to right wing. https://www.politico.com/.…
@nathanjurgenson @nathanjurgenson on x
what kind of evo psych BS is this https://www.politico.com/... argues Facebook is neutral but users have a “primitive” pull towards the reactionary content the site promotes https://twitter.com/...
@amonck @amonck on x
“It's why tabloids do better than ⁦@FT⁩ and it's also a human thing. People respond to engaging emotion much more than they do to, you know, dry coverage.” >> sounds like N Clegg... https://www.politico.com/...
@mariaressa Maria Ressa on x
While platforms abdicated responsibility to protect the public, journalists do our jobs under hostile circumstances. Look forward to working with @carolecadwalla @shoshanazuboff @MarietjeSchaake @ruha9 @IlvesToomas @safiyanoble @DamianCollins @moonalice ++ https://www.nbcnews.com…
@mariaressa Maria Ressa on x
Social media's design and algorithms build in divisiveness, us vs them, and depending on the use of microtargeting and custom audiences, insidiously manipulate us https://www.cigionline.org/... https://twitter.com/...
@evelyndouek Evelyn Douek on x
There is nothing natural or inevitable about the affordances and priorities of platforms (cf https://www.politico.com/...) Don't take it from me—here's Zuckerberg in 2018: https://www.facebook.com/... https://twitter.com/...
@ericgarland Eric Garland on x
Facebook: “Why is Russian propaganda so popular on our site? Is it our PsyOp algorithm? Jeez, we don't know - people just like what they like.” It's Russian malware. Regulate them out of existence. https://www.politico.com/...
@kellumdander Kellum Dander on x
One of the best ways to focus people's brains is to stimulate their amygdalas by frightening them. A frightened brain focuses like a laser on the source of the fear. Critical thinking is shut down in favor of “fight or flight.” This is why conservatism sells. https://twitter.com/…
@iamgryphoneer @iamgryphoneer on x
FB brought on the guy who replaced karl rove in the bush admin to appease cons. he went on to make the algos push hard-right content and protect hard-right outlets from mod action. the “it's just basic human psychological bias and social trends” excuse is bullshit. https://twitte…
@amyspitalnick Amy Spitalnick on x
“That was there in the 30s,” says Facebook of the white supremacy and extremism to which it gives an unparalleled platform. https://twitter.com/...
@karaswisher Kara Swisher on x
History is a bummer to SV https://twitter.com/...
@mcnees Robert McNees on x
So Facebook is a machine designed to pour gasoline on developing fascist movements. Got it. https://twitter.com/...
@jhweissmann Jordan Weissmann on x
This fits neatly into my theory that there simply is no good, healthy version of Facebook that could possibly exist. https://twitter.com/...
@jessecharleslee Jesse Lee on x
Honestly any white nationalist message board would use this same defense. https://twitter.com/...
@dellcam Dell Cameron on x
under no condition would I, or any responsible journalist, ever agree to quote a “Facebook executive” without their name. nothing about this is credible https://www.politico.com/... https://twitter.com/...
@alxthomp Alex Thompson on x
some people pointed out the that “1930's” quote wasn't in the piece. That was just a late night back-and-forth edits slip-up. It is back in the story now. https://www.politico.com/... https://twitter.com/...
@kevinroose Kevin Roose on x
Ah yes, the 1930s, a golden age of information in which promoting angry nationalism and engaging narratives about “the other” famously created no problems whatsoever. https://twitter.com/...
@somospostpc Alex B on x
This is the lamest defense of Facebook's inner workings i've ever read. When you control the visibility algorithms and the UX, you can change so your users don't make a fool of themselves by sharing pure rage in it. https://www.politico.com/... https://twitter.com/...
@hshaban Hamza Shaban on x
Facebook has long held that its news feed is merely a mirror, showing people what they want — as if the design choices of the feed, the amplifying power of the network, and the biases embedded in the algorithms don't exist An unnamed FB exec doubles down https://www.politico.com/…
@kimmaicutler Kim-Mai Cutler on x
Seems like Chris Cox needs to invite in @fturner to speak again and explain the entire WWII & 1940s-era movement of American technologists, policymakers and artists who collaborated to deliberately create a media & voter environment that was more resistant to authoritarianism. ht…
@ldrogen Leigh Drogen on x
The whole point of society and government is literally to blunt the “primitive emotions” that hold us back as a group, congratulations to Facebook for working to destroy that concept Imagine being cynical enough to work at Facebook today https://twitter.com/...
@boztank Boz on x
@oneunderscore__ That's why people need to vote! We are running the largest voter registration campaign in history right now. Democracy is the solution. Sometimes I think people on here think it is the problem...
@natesilver538 Nate Silver on x
This is shoddy logic from the Facebook executive. Humans design the Facebook algorithm, and “engagement” isn't some intrisic quality but one defined by Facebook engineers. https://www.politico.com/... https://twitter.com/...
@teroterotero Tero Kuittinen on x
Looks like a major escalation; America may be effectively crippling the entire Chinese semi and telecom industries. Trump clearly wants a trade war in October as an emblem of his toughness https://twitter.com/...
@brchastain Blake Chastain on x
This is a really convoluted way to say it appeals to white grievance and supremacy. https://twitter.com/...
@williamturton William Turton on x
Starting to get the feeling that Facebook is more focused on public relations than fixing any of the underlying incentives on its platform.... https://twitter.com/...
@oliverdarcy Oliver Darcy on x
I'm not sure anyone argues the algorithm “favors conservatives.” But perhaps the fact that the algorithm rewards outrage content (often built on dishonest premises) is a problem! https://www.politico.com/... https://twitter.com/...
@gregjaffe Greg Jaffe on x
This is akin to saying human nature favors fascism and irrationality. It's irresponsible and untrue. You can choose who gets to use your damn megaphone. Infuriating. https://twitter.com/...
@digiphile Alex Howard on x
Right-wing Pages are popular because: A) @Facebook is exposed to antitrust sanction after abusing market power B) “Working the ref” works C) Far-right content is more engaging, as “in the '30s” D) Newsfeed code favors engaging media E) All of the above https://www.politico.com/..…
@rob_flaherty Rob Flaherty on x
Imagine comparing yourself to people who aided and abetted the rise of global fascism in the 30s as your *defense* https://twitter.com/...
@sjdemas Susan J. Demas on x
“Hitler was really charismatic” <shrug emoji> is an actual argument Facebook is deploying to justify why your feed favors far-right sources. https://twitter.com/...
@rmac18 @rmac18 on x
A question for the anon FB exec: You stated right wing populist content is popular because it is based on fear. Given that Facebook understands that, why does the platform amplify and capitalize on content based on fear?
@mattyglesias Matthew Yglesias on x
This is fine as an explanation but why spend your life working for a company whose business is based on this? https://twitter.com/...
@slpng_giants @slpng_giants on x
And, as @JuddLegum points out, these are decisions being made by people. Perhaps not directly (although some definitely are) but by an algorithm designed by people. This algorithm prioritizes engagement far more than facts or substantive discussion. https://twitter.com/...
@juddlegum Judd Legum on x
Facebook says that it's algorithm is neutral but the right-wing is just BETTER at connecting with people on a “visceral level.” But it was HUMANS at Facebook who CHOSE to make their algorithm favor content that elicits visceral emotions https://www.politico.com/...
@donie Donie O'Sullivan on x
Jesus Christ. When your argument is the Nazis would have been good at Facebook, too.... https://twitter.com/...
@_cingraham Christopher Ingraham on x
That makes it sound like Facebook is optimized for fascism https://twitter.com/...
@slpng_giants @slpng_giants on x
Not sure defending themselves with the 1930s was @Facebook's best call here. https://twitter.com/...
@rmac18 @rmac18 on x
Social media is not simply a reflection of society, particularly when it has the power to amplify or suppress. It's wild that a whole article was based on this. Not to mention there is no explanation in the piece of why they were granted anonymity.
@rmac18 @rmac18 on x
What does this person have to lose by saying this on the record? What position of power are they in? What kind of cover are you providing them as a news outlet? https://twitter.com/...
@rmac18 @rmac18 on x
This whole article was based off an anon FB exec. Why give them anonymity in the first place on this topic? https://www.politico.com/...

Chronicles