Facebook Employees Criticize Zuckerberg’s Inaction over Trump(bloombergquint.com) |
Facebook Employees Criticize Zuckerberg’s Inaction over Trump(bloombergquint.com) |
The only conditions under which a company should react to activist input is if they have done a company wide anonymous poll (and probably of their customer base as well). Otherwise, they will just hear from those who are committed to the cause (radicals/zealots) or have psychological safety to voice their views. Given that big tech companies are mostly SF-based and secondarily Seattle-based, those internal cultures reflect only one perspective (the far-left progressive). Just remember, those far-left progressives make up just 8% of the population (https://hiddentribes.us/profiles). There are almost certainly moderate and conservative employees that back Zuckerberg's position as well.
The side effect of people internet hating on stuff on FB is lots of ad revenue for FB (aka page views). It doesn't matter what side is what, if things on FB are fact checked then there is likely going to be less sharing since there would be less content.
Zuckerberg knows the blowback is coming. I can't see how twitter doesn't become a life long target of the Trump administration to make an example of. If Facebook doesn't want to get caught in the splash zone they might want to back away from this one.
This is kind of true, but also points to just how insane this historical moment is. Can you imagine any prior administration acting this way? Can you imagine Bill Clinton raging out about AOL, or GW Bush trying to sic the FCC on Yahoo because it sent his email to spam?
I wasn't alive for them, but I wouldn't be surprised if Truman or Eisenhower would crush Twitter in the age of McCarthyism. Although they tended to focus on individuals rather than companies or organizations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism
“Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle.”
- Thomas Jefferson
plenty more where that came from at https://www.history.com/news/presidents-relationship-with-pr...
What do you do when a bully is the most powerful person in the world? Well you stand up to them as a community.
Take away his microphone.
"Exceptions may be made" doesn't sound like "you can [do it] all you'd like."
Trump's tweet showed he was concerned, not glorifying. If he wanted to glorify it, he would probably say something more along the lines of "Get in line or we will use our GREAT guns and military and open fire on you thugs." He also wouldn't need riots as an excuse to tweet about such things.
Zuckerberg is supporting freedom of speech when his company didn't have to choose to. He is correct that censoring only worsens the problem and it removes opportunities to improve the situation. If Trump were censored, people would not know him or what he is doing as well as they do now. Amidst all the risk to MZ's company and the violence happening around us, his decision is highly courageous and respectable as he is serving the American people and their rights, even though he said himself that he doesn't like what Trump said.
Really? I'm pretty sure it was meant to /rhyme/.
Trump peddled a racist lie and conspiracy theory for five years, before he was even in politics. Birtherism. And before that, the Central Park Five. And before that the federal lawsuit against him and his dad for discrimination in housing. It's not plausibly deniable. And this is the same thing.
Read that above statement, how is it not fanning the flames? That a way a president get to talk to an oppressed black population?
Our administration acts like that's the case (especially during the HK protests) but it doesn't ring true.