How Facebook Dominated the News Industry in Burma and Sri Lanka

 



๐Ÿ“ฑ From Social Feed to News Feed: How Facebook Dominated the News Industry in Burma and Sri Lanka

In the digital age, the way people consume news has undergone a radical transformation. Newspapers have shrunk, television has fragmented, and social media has surged to the forefront. Nowhere is this shift more dramatic—or more consequential—than in Myanmar and Sri Lanka, where Facebook became not just a platform for connection, but the primary gateway to information, opinion, and political mobilization.

This blog explores how Facebook came to dominate the news ecosystem in these two South Asian nations, the consequences of that dominance, and how its business model—fueled by advertising revenue—shaped the very nature of what people saw, believed, and acted upon.


๐ŸŒ Facebook as the Internet

In many parts of the world, Facebook is just one app among many. But in Myanmar and Sri Lanka, it became synonymous with the internet itself.

Myanmar (Burma)

After decades of military rule, Myanmar began opening up in 2011. With liberalization came a flood of mobile phones and cheap SIM cards. Facebook was often pre-installed on devices, and for many first-time internet users, it was their only online experience. By 2016, over 80% of Myanmar’s internet users were on Facebook.

Sri Lanka

Sri Lanka’s mobile-first internet boom mirrored Myanmar’s. Affordable data plans and widespread smartphone adoption made Facebook the dominant platform for communication, entertainment, and—crucially—news. Traditional media outlets began posting directly to Facebook, and users increasingly relied on their feeds for updates.

In both countries, Facebook wasn’t just a social network. It was the public square, the newsroom, and the rumor mill—all rolled into one.


๐Ÿ“ฐ The Collapse of Traditional Gatekeepers

Historically, news was curated by editors, fact-checked by journalists, and distributed through regulated channels. Facebook disrupted this model by democratizing content creation and distribution.

  • Anyone could post “news”—regardless of accuracy.
  • Algorithms replaced editors, prioritizing engagement over truth.
  • Virality became the new credibility, as shares and likes signaled popularity.

In Myanmar and Sri Lanka, where media literacy was low and trust in traditional institutions was fragile, this shift had profound consequences.


๐Ÿ”ฅ The Rise of Misinformation and Hate Speech

Facebook’s algorithm is designed to maximize engagement. Unfortunately, inflammatory content often performs better than sober reporting. In both countries, this dynamic fueled the spread of misinformation, conspiracy theories, and hate speech.

Myanmar

The most devastating example came during the Rohingya crisis. In 2018, the United Nations declared that Facebook had played a “determining role” in inciting violence against the Rohingya Muslim minority. Extremist Buddhist monks used the platform to spread anti-Muslim propaganda, and coordinated campaigns targeted communities with false narratives.

Sri Lanka

In 2018 and again in 2019, Facebook was used to incite anti-Muslim riots. Fake news stories, doctored images, and hate-filled posts circulated widely, often originating from political actors or nationalist groups. Despite warnings from civil society, Facebook’s moderation systems failed to contain the spread.


๐Ÿง  The Business Model Behind the Feed

To understand why Facebook’s influence became so pervasive—and so dangerous—we need to look at its business model. Facebook (now Meta) is not a neutral platform. It’s an advertising powerhouse.

๐Ÿ’ฐ Revenue Snapshot

In 2024, Meta (Facebook’s parent company) generated $164.5 billion in annual revenue. Of that, approximately $91 billion came from the Facebook app alone. This marked a 21.9% growth compared to the previous year.

Year Meta Revenue (USD) Facebook App Revenue Growth Rate
2023 $134.9 billion ~$75 billion
2024 $164.5 billion ~$91 billion +21.9%

Advertising accounted for the vast majority of this income. Meta’s ability to monetize user attention—especially in emerging markets—was key to its financial success.


๐Ÿ“Š How Advertising Shapes the News

Facebook’s algorithm is optimized to keep users engaged. The longer you scroll, the more ads you see. This creates a feedback loop:

  1. Engaging content is prioritized—even if it’s misleading.
  2. Outrage and emotion drive clicks, boosting ad impressions.
  3. Advertisers pay more for targeted reach, especially in politically charged environments.

In Myanmar and Sri Lanka, where political tensions run high and ethnic divisions are deep, this model amplified the most divisive voices.


๐Ÿ›ก️ Facebook’s Response: Too Little, Too Late?

After global outcry, Facebook pledged to improve its moderation systems. It hired more content reviewers, invested in AI tools, and launched digital literacy campaigns. But critics argue that these efforts were reactive, not proactive.

  • Language barriers: Facebook struggled to moderate content in Burmese and Sinhala.
  • Lack of local context: Algorithms failed to detect culturally specific hate speech.
  • Slow enforcement: Harmful posts often remained online for days or weeks.

In both countries, the damage had already been done.


๐Ÿ“‰ Impact on Journalism

Facebook’s dominance also undermined traditional journalism.

  • Traffic shifted to Facebook, reducing ad revenue for news outlets.
  • Clickbait headlines replaced investigative reporting, as outlets chased engagement.
  • Editorial independence eroded, with some media houses tailoring content to algorithmic trends.

In Sri Lanka, several newspapers downsized or shut down entirely. In Myanmar, independent journalism faced both digital and political threats.


๐Ÿงญ Political Manipulation

Facebook’s reach made it a powerful tool for political actors.

  • Coordinated campaigns spread disinformation during elections.
  • Fake accounts were used to amplify partisan narratives.
  • Bots and trolls targeted journalists and activists.

In Myanmar, the military used Facebook to shape public opinion before and after the 2021 coup. In Sri Lanka, political parties leveraged the platform to mobilize supporters and attack rivals.


๐ŸŒ The Global vs Local Dilemma

Facebook’s global policies often failed to account for local realities. Decisions made in Silicon Valley didn’t reflect the complexities of South Asian societies.

  • Cultural nuances were ignored
  • Local experts were sidelined
  • Platform governance lacked transparency

This disconnect allowed harmful content to flourish—and left communities vulnerable.


๐Ÿ’ก What Needs to Change

If Facebook wants to be a responsible global platform, it must rethink its approach:

1. Invest in Local Moderation

Hire native speakers with cultural expertise. AI alone can’t catch everything.

2. Support Independent Journalism

Partner with local newsrooms, offer grants, and prioritize credible sources in the feed.

3. Increase Transparency

Publish country-specific data on content moderation, takedowns, and algorithmic changes.

4. Empower Users

Offer tools for reporting misinformation, controlling feed content, and verifying sources.

5. Reform the Algorithm

Shift from engagement-based ranking to trust-based curation—especially for news.


๐Ÿ”ฎ Looking Ahead

Facebook’s dominance in Myanmar and Sri Lanka is a cautionary tale. It shows how a platform built for connection can become a vector for division. It reveals the dangers of algorithmic amplification without accountability. And it underscores the need for tech companies to treat emerging markets not as revenue streams, but as communities with unique needs and vulnerabilities.

As Meta continues to grow—exploring AI, VR, and the metaverse—it must confront the legacy of its past. That means acknowledging harm, investing in repair, and building systems that prioritize truth over clicks.


๐Ÿ’ฌ Final Thoughts

In 2024, Facebook helped Meta earn over $164 billion in revenue. But in Myanmar and Sri Lanka, the cost of that dominance was measured not in dollars, but in lives, trust, and democratic integrity.

The question now is not whether Facebook can dominate the news industry. It’s whether it can do so responsibly.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What Napoleon III and Haussmann Did to Modernize Paris

Would Gandhiji be dismissed as woke in 2025 ? Would Independence be possible against the Washington lobby today?