I can't find a definition like that. Wikipedia has it as "Doublespeak is language that deliberately obscures, disguises, distorts, or reverses the meaning of words." Which seems to fit perfectly for Facebook's behavior.
I’d say doublespeak would be if “advertising integrity” were the department charged with respecting users’ privacy and (informed) choices, while said dept. executed Facebook’s policies that go very much against these things.
But if parent is correct, the role is to enforce things users want (regarding spam/fraud/illegal goods), which matches standard notions of integrity, so it’s not doublespeak.
I don’t know that I’d call it doublespeak. There’s a lot to be said for defining a job in terms of what it’s trying to produce rather than what it’s trying to fight.
In principle, good point. In practice, it really depends on where your levels of cynicism are at. Crediting FB with wanting to "produce 'integrity'" or even that they're "trying to fight" the myriad of destructive externalities their money-geyser has spewed forth is.. generous.
I think the point is more that they are fighting click-spam and other kinds of advertising fraud, to maintain the integrity of their advertising platform, in the sense in which an antivirus is maintaining the integrity of your system; NOT the sense in which an anti-graft law is maintaining the integrity of a politician.
