How many causes are there on facebook

Blueprint Programs. Ads Guide. Safety and Integrity. Business Equality. Social Good. Find a Business Partner. Create an Ad chevron-down chevron-down Create a Page. Create a Page. Create an Ad. Examples include: Health causes e. Continuing to Reach your Audience We remain committed to helping small businesses, non-profits, and advocacy groups reach their audiences.

In addition to broad targeting such as gender and age, below are some of our top tips and example use cases for our partners: An advocacy group looking to drive donations or a small business trying to connect with its customers can use Engagement Custom Audiences to reach people who have liked their Page or people who have watched their videos that may have appeared in News Feed Video View Engagement Custom Audiences.

Businesses and groups can also use these Engagement Custom Audiences as a seed audience to build Lookalike Audiences to help them further widen the people they can reach. Additionally, businesses and groups who have permission from their customers are able to use their customer data for targeting via customer lists from a custom audience. Tags Announcements.

Related Articles. Get Facebook Business news in your inbox. Sign up. Facebook Pages. Instagram Profiles. Facebook Ads. Messenger Ads. Instagram Ads. Set Up a Facebook Page.

Getting Started with Messenger. Grow Online Sales. Measure and Optimize Ads. View All Goals. Business Types. Through Facebook Fundraisers, people have supported these organizations and many more:. Thank you to everyone who supported these causes, and so many others. To help more people easily raise money for nonprofits through Instagram Stories, we recently expanded the donation sticker to Europe.

We are grateful to everyone around the world who has donated to or started a fundraiser using our apps. On behalf of the organizations and people who have benefited from your passion and generosity, thank you. To help personalize content, tailor and measure ads, and provide a safer experience, we use cookies.

By clicking or navigating the site, you agree to allow our collection of information on and off Facebook through cookies. What is the theory for why changing who owns Instagram would stop teenage girls from looking at self-harm content, and for that content being shared and suggested? Why would the dynamics change? Such a move certainly would not make it any easier to compete with Instagram, just as making YouTube a separate company would not make it any easier to make a new video-sharing site.

The network effects are internal to the product, not the ownership. Not everything is an antitrust problem, and most policy problems are complicated and full of trade-offs. In the US, the cult of the First Amendment makes this even harder. He co-led the historic congressional investigation into Big Tech and antitrust which finished last year, and has been one of the most senior members of his party to join with Democrats in bipartisan legislation to strengthen antitrust laws. The obvious dangers of the platform are that bad people can use it for evil purposes.

And then there are other unintended consequences where good people use it and are harmed through no fault of their own, but just because of the psychological impact. Facebook should be able to recall its product and to ameliorate the damages that are done before it goes too far.

Part of it has to be a personnel issue with leadership and the failure of leadership. I think that people who were in the know and realized that there was an increase in teen suicide rates, and that there was a relationship between their product and that increase — and they continued doing what they did — should be held criminally liable.

And as a member of Congress, what can you do? What are you doing to try to hold those people responsible? I think that the role of Congress is to examine the situation — which we did with a month investigation on the antitrust subcommittee — [and] expose the problems. And obviously, we saw things from the outside that now the whistleblower has confirmed from the inside with very damaging documents.

Two, trying to fix the situation which we are in with antitrust laws, and perhaps with reforms to Section And then No.

I think we make much more rational decisions when consumers make that choice. Do you think that Facebook can be fixed with Mark Zuckerberg at the helm? But Facebook cannot continue to exist, should not continue to exist, the way they have. Rashad Robinson is the president of Color of Change, a civil rights advocacy group that co-led a historic advertiser boycott against Facebook last June in protest of the proliferation of hate speech on the platform.

And I would create real consequences and liability to its business model for the harm that it causes. And I would force Facebook to actually have to pay reparations for the harm they have done to local independent media , and to all the sorts of institutions that their sort of platform has destroyed. There was no one to ask at the White House to get involved in this. Now a year has happened and we have a Biden administration.

And so my demands are not to Facebook anymore, my demands are to the Biden administration and to Congress, and to tell them that they actually have to do their jobs, that we have outsized harm being done by this platform, and they actually have to do something about it. The current leadership lacks the sort of moral integrity to be the type of problem solvers our society needs.

And the sooner they deal with the structures that have allowed them to be in charge, the better for all of us. But to be clear, this moment we are in — the story will be told in generations about who Mark Zuckerberg is and what he has done.

And Mark Zuckerberg will always want to play by a different set of rules. He believes he can. Nate Persily co-founded an academic partnership program with Facebook in , called Social Science One , which aimed to give researchers studying the real-world effects of social media unprecedented access to otherwise private Facebook data.

In , Persily resigned from the program. He has since discussed the limitations of voluntary programs like Social Science One and is calling for legislation to mandate companies like Facebook to share more information with outside researchers. The internet platforms have lost their right to secrecy.

They simply are too big and too powerful. They cannot operate in secret like a lot of other corporations. And so they have an obligation to give access to their data to outsiders. I have been working on this for five years. There is a fundamental disagreement between conventional wisdom and what the platforms are saying on any number of these issues. Why should the average person care about Facebook being transparent with its data with researchers?

If you think that these platforms are the cause of any number of social problems stretching from anorexia to genocide, then we cannot trust their representations as to whether social media is innocent or guilty of committing these problems or contributing to these problems. And so [transparency] is a prerequisite to any kind of policy intervention in any of these areas, as well as actions by civil society.

So part of it is informing governments and policymakers, but some of it is also informing us about what the dangers are on the platforms and how we can act to prevent them. Transparency is a meta problem, if you will. It is the linchpin to studying every other problem as to the harms that social media is wreaking on society.

And let me also say, we should be prepared for the possibility that when we do have access to the data, the truth is going to be not as bad as people think. The FTC, working with the National Science Foundation, shall develop a program for vetted researchers and research projects, and shall compel the platforms to share the data with those researchers in a privacy-protected format. The data will reside at the firms [and will] not be given over to the federal government, so that we prevent another Cambridge Analytica.

We should require [social media platforms] to disclose certain things to the public that are not privacy-dangerous.

Massachusetts Sen. Ed Markey, a Democrat, has been a key congressional voice on online privacy for children for over two decades. We have to upgrade that law in order to pass a long-overdue bill of rights for kids and for teens, so that kids under 16 get the same protection as kids under I would say [we should also] ban targeted ads to children and create an online eraser button, so parents and children can tell companies to delete the troves of data that they have collected about young people.

And to have a cybersecurity protection requirement for kids and teens. Kids are uniquely vulnerable. And we adults need to make sure that their data is not being used in ways that are harmful to them.

Do you think Facebook can be fixed with Mark Zuckerberg at the helm? I think regardless of who is running Facebook, we have to put a new, tough regulatory scheme in place in the event that Mark Zuckerberg leaves and his successor has the exact same philosophy.

We have to trust our laws. I think that the antitrust process is something that should begin. We need to pass an impressive set of laws that stop social media giants from invading our privacy. She advised Congress on the role of foreign influence misinformation networks in the US elections. DiResta has also been one of the first social media researchers to track how anti-vaccine content and other kinds of false or extremist content spreads through Facebook Groups.

If I could pick one thing to really focus on in the short term, it would be more sophisticated rethinking of groups and how people are recommended groups, and how groups are evaluated for inclusion and being promoted to other people.

Why do you think fixing Groups is more important than, say, what people see in their news feed? QAnon came out of these groups that were recommended to people, and then they came to be places where people really felt that they had found new friends and, in a sense, that kind of insularity.