1) In the 50s and 60s, we on the left had to fight like hell for the right to speak our ideas. Around every corner was an agent of one or another division of government, federal, state, or local, filming and recording your every public action.
We learned that to have the ability to speak, everyone else had to have the same right. It made of us fanatical First-Amendment Free-Speechers.
I don't understand the presently active generations. Instead of being the core of the bulwark against government surveillance and censorship, what calls itself the left has broken into the lead in demanding state and private censorship of political expression.
I hope you don't win.
I hope Zuckerberg, who has inherited the proud 60-year-old Red Banner of Freedom of Speech, wins every battle.
If you do win, and Zuckerberg is leashed, not so long afterward, you are going to wish you hadn't been so arrogant in your quest for New, Improved Speech Rules.
You're going to say "Oh. That's why they were so unhip about free speech."
2) You mock Zuckerberg as essentially saying: " We never asked to be this powerful! It just sort of happened!" This was the main defense of the Good Empire, the British one. Since we adore all things British these days, shouldn't this be a credit to Zuckerberg.
3) "No one man should have all that power." I remember reading this as a white jab at Malcolm X back in 1963 or so.
1
I can't believe he hasn't been #MeToo'd ... His original intent to create Facebook was to "rate" Harvard women students on their looks. Where are the boycotts and #MeToo outrage? Why does Zuckerberg get a pass?
3
Exactly. Exactly why I don’t support Libra, as well. Like handing money to a shyster.
3
Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic outrage amplified to idiots.
5
Facebookers, use the site to keep up with friends near and far if you find it convenient; but please, for the sake of democracy, read the news from a legitimate source of your choice, not facebook. Ignore the bots and your uncle harry's diatribes!
6
A critique of Mr. Zuckerberg and the unintended influence his company has on American society and politics is certainly valid and warrented. However this notion that being a billionare can't
be defended is laughable. Life is not fair! If you are over the age of
6 and you have not learned that you will be very confused in this
world. Corporations and corporate profit is why we have the standard of living we have, since modern banking was invented in Renaissance Italy in 15th century Florence. If not for corporations, we would all be using out houses and chopping down trees to heat our hovel while we hitched up the horses to bring our corn to the mill. Mr. Manjoo as usual projects sophomore high school logic- they have so much money and someone goes hungry. Not fair! After he wipes away the tears, he writes an op-ed.
He looks totally stressed out to me.
1
Mark Zuckerberg is, without a shadow of a doubt, the most nauseating public figure in the world.
4
He consistently reminds me of a teenager who is clearly over his head.
4
Zuck, Sheryl Sandberg and Kaplan are all despicable people just in it for the money and they support the right wing while pretending to be doing good. They need to be monitored. The NSA should be watching them and their extreme followers.
His product destroys the vulnerable ,lonely and mentally ill.
He destroys reality for children and they are never the same again after their tiny thumbs learn the operating systems of their “ toys”.
Tech isn’t helping society at all . Civilization was okay without home computers. Why did we all get taken in??
Ahhhh. Corporate America thanks for destroying the earth for humans.
Hello cyborg world. Begin the implants.
Science fiction self propagating
My poor kids. I’m encouraging no grand babies. What a future in store for the survivors of this debacle ???
2
Let's think for a moment about which individual would succeed Zuckerberg as ruler of the Facebook empire.
The most likely successor would be his chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg. This succession would be akin to the New York mafia don Frank Costello retiring to to be replaced by his psychopathic lieutenant Vito Genovese.
We know from press reports that Sandberg has been "the tip of the spear" in Facebook's war to discredit journalists and to blackmail them in order to deter negative press coverage.
We know that Sandberg is in charge of Facebook's "dirty tricks" department. If you are a whistle-blower inside Facebook, Sandberg hires private investigators and security personnel to harass you and to intimidate you into silence.
Leaked emails have repeatedly shown that Zuckerberg has been trying to "rein in" Sandberg due to her ingravescent hardball tactics. She makes Zuckerberg seem like an angel.
In sum:
If Zuckerberg retires and Sandberg assumes the mantle of power, Facebook might further metastasize from a greedy media conglomerate selling your personal data into an organized crime-like entity which will routinely utilize blackmail and harassment against both its employees and targeted journalists. It might get very, very ugly.
Facebook is like a mafia family. Who do you want to be the mafia don? Frankly, Sheryl "Vito Genovese" Sandberg is not a good idea. As a wise old Italian would say: Fuhgettaboutit.
I do not use facebook , as a matter of principle
That said, Mr. Zuckerberg does a good job (I know IT, computers and have worked in Silicon Valley) if you believe in that sort of thing (Again , I don't)
The more you succeed, the more enemies you have.
===
This comment was written via a Linux OS
What an excellent idea! Please, Zuck, go sit on a beach.
Let's see; so far- you're almost single-handedly responsible for Trump's election, by allowing Russian trolls to run wild; a disaster for the entire planet And now that you've decided Sophomore Philosophy 101 should rule decisions on what politicians can say (e.g. "Reality is a hoax,, and you can't prove nothin!" – never mind that Higgs boson and gravity waves noise...) - heck, you could do even more damage.
Or alternatively- find some actual grownups to run Facebook.
"... his product doesn’t kill hundreds of thousands of people a year..." I think the Rohingya people would beg to differ, if they weren't living in squalid camps outside of their homeland due to government death squads.
I just saw tonight's exellent interview on Democracy Now--see web site-- with Roger McNamee, recent author of
“Zucked: Waking Up to the Facebook Catastrophe.” He's got a video on c-span. Was once a mentor to Zuckerberg.
Quote:
“Early Facebook Investor Roger McNamee on How the Company Became a Threat to Democracy.
Says “ I Tried to Raise Alarm Over Russian Interference,but Was Ignored.
Big Tech Platforms Have Had a “Profound Negative Effect on Democracy.” Is It Time to Break Them Up?
We Need to Hold Big Tech Accountable For Creating “Toxic Digital Spills”
Seems that social media has helped create a toxic climate change in our politics. It's taken advantage of our political culture of weak govt regulation of corporations---and of big money in politics.
Manjoo's description of Zuck sounds almost like Trump.
".... constantly muddled about the complexities of the problems..... makes frequent unforced errors (lies).... conflates what’s good for Facebook (himself) with what’s good for America."
And we hear constant excuses for both Zuck and Trump.
We can say that America has been 'Trumped'.
Oh please, can someone make him go away?
1
Another megalomaniac. I wish the human race would evolve, and stop producing them. Would you trust this man with control of your currency?
1
He's too busy trying to install Pete Buttigieg in the White House.
1
Mark Zuckerberg. I feel for you.....not!
1
"his product doesn’t kill hundreds of thousands of people a year, and he isn’t destroying the environment." No, it just incites genocide. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/15/technology/myanmar-facebook-genocide.html
I do not agree that "Zuckerberg's product doesn't kill...people."
Lawmakers from the home state of Myanmar’s persecuted Rohingya minority regularly posted hateful anti-Muslim content on Facebook and, in some cases, explicitly called for violence, according to an analysis by BuzzFeed News. The posts were made both before and for months after state-led violence displaced 700,000 Rohingya Muslims last year, in what the UN has described as genocide.
3
Give the guy a break! Zuckerberg isn’t deliberately trying to destroy western civilization, he just wants to profit from it.
20
I support Zuke's retirement; permanent would be good-
3
“He doesn’t run private prisons, his product doesn’t kill hundreds of thousands of people a year, and he isn’t destroying the environment.”
Well, the social monstrosity’s server farms aren’t running on squirrel wheels. So there is that.
2
Farhad et al., not everyone hates the tech industry, or Mark Zuckerberg, as much as you do. Your hatred is nothing more than resentment; it stems primarily from that the fact that this one industry, which drives our limited economic growth more than any other, is beyond your control.
If you only read the NYT, you'd think Facebook was hated by everybody. Yet it continues to thrive, and Zuckerberg remains rich and successful. Facebook was supposed to have been replaced by various other social media entities since at least 2009, yet it continues to thrive.
The tech industry continues to advance our society technologically, while its critics sneer, but don't help anyone.
3
Zuckerberg is destroying American democracy. All he cares about is filling his pockets with dollars, rubles, or any other currently he can get his hands on, nothing more.
3
The acknowledged credo of Facebook is "Move fast and break things."
Well, they certainly have succeeded in that!
They've broken the privacy boundaries of some 2 billion FB users. They've broken any semblance of security regarding the integrity of our electoral process. And they've broken their promises to clean up the mess - and institute significant changes - again and again...and again.
And now, while "moving fast" - and continuing to break things - Zuckerberg went before Congress today to talk about creating his own currency; a currency to compete with our monetary system.
He employed his usual slippery - either immature or manipulative - logic in declaring we must "keep up with the Chinese." (I know a certain someone whom that will especially appeal to.)
Zuckerberg also proclaimed his love for this country.
Mark Zuckerberg, if you truly love this country - and recognize the damage your company has done - pledge to spend all your waking hours fixing what's been broken by you...
...and while you are at it, ban all political advertising on Facebook now through Election Day 2020. You say it is only a small portion of your profits...so why not?
Put your love of, and commitment to this nation...where your mouth is. You can move fast...and heal things.
2
"He doesn’t run private prisons.."
Though he does run a business which deliberately encourages widespread screen addiction.
"...his product doesn’t kill hundreds of thousands of people a year,"
Ignoring genocide in Myanmar, and not a few mass shootings.
"...and he isn’t destroying the environment."
No. Just democracy.
1
Facebook should NOT be involved in politics. It is supposed to be a SOCIAL media—something to keep in touch with Granny cousins pals etc. If Zuckerberg doesnt discourage it from being more, then Facebook should be cancelled. We have newspapers and television to deal with politics. We dont need Facebook for peddling nasty lies and insults either. We have Donald Trump for that job. Zuckerberg should butt out of politics or fold Facebook. We’ve had enough of his dirt.,
Why are people using Facebook? It’s not a required utility? Also, the application is “free”.
Better yet, invent your own Facebook.
Americans have declined precipitously over the last 25 years. It’s disgraceful.
Quit FB in 2011 during all the political screaming, although all the “I’m happier than you are” stuff preceding it was the precursor. It was an instant relief, and don’t miss it. Something’s way off with Zuckerberg. I don’t mean that in a snarky way, I mean in a medically diagnosable way. But if he must stay king of his realm, he needs to at least wise up intellectually.
Farhad, lighten up. The only two groups that take Facebook seriously are journalists riding the Facebook-is-the-end-of-civilization bandwagon (and their acolytes), and the semi-literates who remain convinced, against all evidence to the contrary, that Facebook is a source for news.
Any Facebook user brighter than an eggplant understands that their Facebook feed consists of amateur opinions algorithmically selected to feed their prejudices, friends and family fluff to warm the artificial soul, propaganda: domestic and foreign, and lots of advertising.
That many half-wits think their Facebook feed is credible and unbiased news is little reason to turn Zuckerberg into a punching bag. Facebook is hardly a monopoly over anything of significance. It's not news, but if it was, there's newspapers, TV, Radio, and countless websites which would offer significant competition.
Zuck is the modern day P.T. Barnum who wisely stated: “Nobody ever lost a dollar by underestimating the taste of the American public.”
In this column Manjoo confirms Barnum's maxim.
3
I wish the whole FB go bankrupt, this guys platform creates more problem around the world than helps anything
1
The real existential crisis for Fecbook is when users stop using it. All users have this power. Use it.
1
People who criticize dot com giants are ignorant of the impact they are having on life of every individual on the earth. They know more about you than your friends and family. Now if they succeed with launching a currency, it's like letting Walmart run the federal reserve.
Most Facebook shareholders don't like him either, as CA. Rep Katie Porter said on CNN tonight.
And Business Insider-- June 4, 2019
“At Facebook's annual shareholder meeting, 68% of outside investors want the company to hire an independent chairman.
The majority was up from 51% last year.
Despite the revolt, the proposals did not pass because of Zuckerberg's voting control of the stock, which means he can swat away shareholder demands.
"Arrogance is not a substitute for good corporate governance," Michael Connor, who helped coordinate action among activist Facebook investors, said.”
Interesting. So now let's have some columns on FB activist investors. Give 'em some publicity.
Also, discuss this--NYT, Oct 3. "Facebook Can Be Forced to Delete Content Worldwide, E.U.’s Top Court Rules ---
The decision that individual countries can order Facebook to take down posts globally sets a benchmark for the reach of European laws governing the internet."
1
It never ceases to amaze me that people use Facebook.
What a con job.
L-O-V-E the turn of phrase: "There is something slightly unfair about this, in a very tiny-violin sort of way." You are my writer's hero, Mr. Farhad Manjoo!
well, it's no wonder little zuckie is such a Trump fan; allowing his campaign to publish lies in its ads. They both think they are above the law and not subject to being questioned by mere mortals.
Farhad, of course you are right, but you have created an octopus of an essay and unwittingly contributed to the Facebook problem with your surfeit of links, most of which are not germane.
De-link ninety percent of those websites for a better read. They are like advertisements embedded in your narrative.
"his products dont kill hundreds of thousands" true, but his product has zero to redeem it. It adds nothing, selfies for the foolish vs free information for the bots and adverstisers. and due to the greed of the board, who put personal profit above all else, it is destroying democracy by taking the role of journalism with none of the responsibilities. Shame on him.
Mark Zuckerberg is lucky.
Facebook eliminates voice communication.
Cryptovisual communication - cryptocurrency.
No one seems to get that Facebook isn’t “real”.
Hard to figure out zuck.
Is he ignoring the fact that Facebook is just a tool that people will use for good or for evil because...
1. He truly is an idealistic millennial that doesn’t get that there are bad people in the world.
2. He truly is a hard core business man that gets that Facebook profits on ads, the more of them, the better.
It is sort of like inventing “the gun” and thinking naively “this will help people defend themselves and make the world a better place” or inventing “the gun” and thinking “let’s sell this to everyone!”
Which one is Zuck?
1
Because he's an egomaniac who thinks he's "changing the world". Not untrue....just not in the ways he imagined. Yes, leave dude, go figure out some ways to actually do good in the world with your obscene fortune.
1
Do you want to chip in to support him if he takes the decade off?
Facebook: Just quit.
I hold no brief for billionaires. I think Elizabeth Warren's proposed wealth tax is fine, maybe even too modest, but Mark Zuckerberg is certainly not the most undeserving multi billionaire in America.
There are quite a few who are absolutely reprehensible.
Hi is on everyone's radar, unlike many others.
I doubt he takes Farhad Manjoo's advice or opinion into account.
Nor should he.
Why the constant negativity, Mr. Manjoo ? Maybe an essay praising Warren Buffett would be welcome. If Zuckerberg is
" everyone's favorite punching bag ", why be part of the herd ?
Say something original.
Zuckerberg is the American Murdoch!
So the FBI locks up a bunch of rich moms for bribing their kids into universities, but Zuck can lie with impunity to Congress and all FB users? what a country, what a country.
1
OK, admittedly not the point, but with all that money can’t he find a decent hair stylist?
3
Why blame the platform? Are the readers really so stupid that they believe the political baloney on FB? I don't go on it, but really folks - the writers are responsible for what they write, and the readers are responsible for verifying information or ads. Who are you trying to shield from reading anything which he or she is entitled to read, or anything which he or she is entitled to write? Is that even constitutional?
1
Please, please stop, FB sows disinformation, not only politically, but too every aspect of life, stop the self righteous behavior and look how things collapse, under fraudulent activity via FB,
After listening to today's testimony, I am absolutely convinced the NYT is going to finally shut down all their Facebook accounts.
That would be so brave and courageous.
1
And, the fact he’s fluent in Chinese as he negotiates with the Chinese to the detriment of political dissent....it’s just bone-chilling.
It is a cop out of the leaders and intellectuals of America to nonchalantly blame Mark of all the problems dogging our society. Mr. Manjoo included.
Mark built a company, hired the best and brightest of American youth, and transformed Silicon Valley and American society.
If folks wants to use his platform to spew hate and racist ideologies, shame on them.
Enough with victimizing Mark.
7
Deep down, Mark Zuckerberg is a really good person. And I think he, along with the Google fellas, Bill Gates, and Warren Buffet could form a fantastic philanthropy brain trust to solve the world's clean energy and transportation problems. Perhaps he can actually get to tackling the problems in US educational system (e.g., people like Betsy Devos profiting off of government student loans), as opposed to throwing money at the problem. These people are problem solvers in their nature, and really good ones. Facebook is going to be fine without him, just like Google and Microsoft are fine with out Gates, Brin, and Page.
8
@JG
Bill Gates? Are you kidding? Bill Gates tried to stop malaria in Africa with nets that are used now for eco system destroying fishing. He also promotes the use of chemical fertilizers, so that African agriculture is missing out on the boom in organic product sales to Europe.
7
It’s a crazy thought, but how about we rely on properly supported public bodies to serve the overwhelming public interest in mitigating the effects of global warming. Such touching faith in the goodwill of billionaires is positively harmful for the rest of us who share the planet.
16
@JG
Bill Gates?
Warren Buffet?
Two men who listen to their consciences.
Bill and Melinda Gates are trying to stamp out disease.
Warren Buffet has supported an overhaul of our tax system which would take more money from him. Buffet has pledge to give most of his money to charity.
Mark Zuckerberg isn't fit to shine their shoes.
1
“his product doesn’t kill hundreds of thousands of people a year”
Maybe not hundreds of thousands, but his “product” kills.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-46145986
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_WhatsApp_lynchings
Mr. Manjoo, see the following from just 1 week ago in your newspaper:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/17/style/rich-people-things.html
Maybe Mr. Zuckerberg just likes working (or is addicted to to it) in spite of the flack that he takes.
1
Why not enroll in college instead of a vacation? Indulge in the humanities, take some philosophy courses, maybe art history or English lit. You may look back and understand why you were so clueless.
Were Mr Zuckerberg to retire, a worse plague would fill the vacuum.
We are damned either way.
Until simple federal laws regulate these advertising. data mining, privacy taking machines, Mr Zuckerberg, and the Google Yahoo's of the world will run rampant on humanity.
1
Facebook is guilty of high crimes and treason.
Holy smokes, Farhad! What a fantastically crispy bit of writing! Hurrah!
1
Mr. Manjoo,
Very surprised to read this mean criticism of Mark Zuckerberg from you. The tone and negativity is overt and that doesn't jive with most of your previous columns.
Mary Fields
Just a suggestion for Mr. Manjoo: When your editorial's purpose is to criticize someone for being shallow and self-serving, it's best not to end it by quoting Kanye West!
3
Mark Zuckerberg testifies before Congress....AGAIN? Come on now, do we really expect to hear the TRUTH behind the strategy to capture as much of our personal data and use it, for profit, from this man? We've heard it all before. We've heard him speak, unknowingly, about ways to protect his company from government scrutiny. ACTIONS speak louder than words and frankly I don't believe anything this man says, let alone sitting before a Congressional panel ONCE AGAIN.
90
My nieces and nephews are young Millenials who stopped using FB for various reasons, including distrust of Zuckerberg and the overall brand. They persuaded the rest of us older folks to stop posting there as well. Surprisingly, we've gotten by as an extended family by keeping in touch with group text messaging and emails. People still share news articles, quotes, and vacation photos, only without having to use FB a platform.
The World Wide Web is so much more than FB, Instagram, or WhatsApp. I remember thinking I could never survive without America Online and Yahoo Mail, but I adapted. All of these tools can be replicated elsewhere, but without the invasion of privacy, nation destabilization, or user manipulation.
124
@John W But, did they stop using Instagram, and Whatsapp? Because Zuckerberg owns all those social media apps, too.
2
What is lost in all of this is that Facebook users have freely given him all of that power and wealth. They each signed that proverbial agreement with the devil, "I'll trade you my soul" (all of my personal private data to post cat pictures on Facebook, to "friend" people that I don't even know, to be subjected to false advertising and "fake news"). The best way to pull the plug on Zuckegberg is to remove your Facebook account.
139
@Steve
There's a lot of truth to that, but one of the most pernicious things about Facebook is that they track you all over the web whether you have an account or not. This level of tracking is not obvious to most people who sign up for cat pics and keeping in touch with family. And even if you opt out by not having a Facebook account, they create a shadow profile for you. Every page with a Facebook Like button is sending data back to Facebook even if you never interact with it.
You can ameliorate this danger somewhat by installing an ad blocker that blocks trackers, but some data will likely still slip through the cracks back to Facebook.
11
@Steve
Not to mention that a big part of us giving him all that power and wealth comes from the fact that apparently, as a species, we aren't smart enough to know that one should not unhesitatingly believe every last thing one sees or hears on a phosphorescent screen.
4
And, a big part of the power we gave him stems from the fact that apparently, as a species, we’re not smart enough to remember not to believe everything we see or hear on a screen—especially in an era of weaponized lies and deep fakes.
1
Zuckerberg is hardly a "punching bag". The more he appears before Congress, the more Facebook gets publicity and more ads. Consequently the stock price rises.
He is the smartest guy in the room, but also one of the smarmiest.
I guess being smarmy is what pays off in this decade of Trump.
1
Zuckerberg and Facebook are the perfect example of the Peter Principle - he’s risen to his level of incompetence- he rakes in money through his unscrupulous monitoring of people’s private lives. Now he wants in on cyber currency. Given the instability of Bitcoin sounds like a way for FB to fleece people. I canned Facebook years ago - a waste of human time and effort. Zuckerberg shied his ignorance every time he speaks. Another Trump!
Facebook as a platform is garbage. It allows propaganda to flourish, leading to violence against muslims in Sri Lanka and in Myanmar, election manipulation across the globe, and politicians to run as with outright unchecked lies in their message. Since they've decided not to crack down on the free reign of content on their private platform, they are essentially a whitewashed version of 8chan. Fabebook and Twitter are both catering to the lowest common denominator and Zuckerberg's statement that political ads simply are not significant revenue drivers is just nonsense. Facebook should be a company that can find pride in every single $1 they make on their platform. If they cannot do that, they need to retool their policies until they can. There are a lot of good, fair minded people working for Facebook. I feel sorry that they have to work for such a company that betrays the trust of the people it makes its money off of.
Free speech has turned Facebook into a giant garbage can. If Zuckerberg wants to claim that there is something sacred about free speech -- notwithstanding exceptions such as crying "fire" in a crowded theater, telling a child her parents hate her, and countless millions of other exceptions -- he is lying to cover his desire for endless power, a most neurotic desire. Once again, decency, not some pseudo-objective Platonic ideal of morality or rights, is the ultimate arbiter of the good.
There's a good reason Zuckerberg is the punching bag. He deserves it because he's incompetent and clueless about securing all the private data he is collecting. Every year it's a same story: there is a breach or scandal of some kind at Facebook and Zuckerberg is hauled into the Capitol and he fesses up and says he didn't do as good as he should have. Rinse, repeat. Facebook needs to be taken away from him - he's a like a kid running around the house with a scissors.
you had me, until you quoted Kayne West. anyway- Zuckerberg needs to eliminate all political ads. He is ruining democracy. Disappointed you downplayed that.
I think that the writer does not quite understand the mind of an on the spectrum nerd like Zuckerberg. Guys like him don’t go sit on a mountaintop (or under a palm tree) and contemplate life. They don’t take up mountain climbing or auto racing. They need a narrowly defined project in the center of their vision at all times, to keep them engaged. Zuckerberg’ s life project is Facebook. I don’t see him handing over the reins easily. I think he would be lost.
I met Zuckerberg once and was knocked back by the palpable absence in his expression. It was like looking into the face of a humanoid robot.
Freedom of speech does not include outright lying. Mark Zuckerberg is wrong, and he’s a despicable greedy self important and arrogant person for thinking he has the right to impose his own idea on the rest of us, even though it conveniently makes him fantastically wealthy in the process.
If there was any chance of me looking up to him or admiring him for his accomplishments, it is zero now.
Mark Zuckerberg disgusts me.
First he says the Elizabeth Warren is a threat to his company. Then he says it's ok for political ads to lie. I strongly believe that the Republicans are much more willing to brazenly lie than the
Democrats, just look at Trump everyday. So his policy wants to insure that the Republicans will win again.
Obviously you can't post that it's OK to drink poison to prevent hair loss. But Zuck's position is that political poison is just fine with him. And not even beginning to think about the lies Russia will tell to elect Trump again.
1
Exactly, Farhad!
Inevitably what happens in cases like these (at least that I've observed) is that the leader feels like this is baby that nobody is every quite going to understand is as cute as he thinks it is, therefore he can't criticize it and fix it appropriately. It isn't a baby who's feelings would be hurt if he did criticize it, the feelings most hurt would be his own!
"Free and always will be", isn't that what they said originally? Until now, of course because they don't say that anymore. Why? Because antitrust is going to force him to compete with subscription-based, privacy-heavy and non ad-driven models.
I have nothing personally against him. He's a bright guy. But his accomplishment to payout ratio is the smallest in the history of the world. Well, the Google founders run a close second.
I suspect there's something in his heart that thinks if he let go of the reigns that things would get even worse. And he might be right. Which is the reason that people with extremely high, innocent goals for their company should never go public.
But he wanted Kuai to himself. It's just no good hearing all of those other people having fun around you.
Spreading deliberate lies is like spreading poison. But Facebook is different from Fox News. Fox can't be shamed, because it is their deliberate intention to anger lots of people. FB can be shamed into action, because they just want to protect their business. Right now FB is more afraid of the right than of the center or left. Perhaps if we start calling it "Falsebook," Zuckerberg will get the message that the center is important too, and it would be better for his business to be a responsible citizen.
#Falsebook
FB is a cancer and, like cigarettes, should come with a protective warning label. I sincerely hope the platform is more scrupulous with its customers Libra “equity” than it is with its other currency troves, ie customers (highly marketable) private information.
Perhaps FB should step out of the business of selling political ads (both true and false!) and return to its original altruistic mission of keeping us all connected with people from high school! I don’t think so. MZ values good profits more than he does good press.
"Zuckerberg is not an evil business mastermind. He doesn’t run private prisons, his product doesn’t kill hundreds of thousands of people a year, and he isn’t destroying the environment."
By enabling the election of Trump, Zuckerberg is destroying the environment, Trump's faux pas throughout the world have killed many, and his party supports things like private prisons.
Mark Zuckerberg is an arrogant man child as accurately portrayed in The Social Network. His company provides no real service to the consumers and nothing but fluff. Americans and the world could do without the network. In fact, America would be far better off without Facebook and its disinformation campaigns in the name of free speech.
Zuckerberg’s hubris about his purloined Facebook enterprise is nauseating. He is avoiding putting controls in place that would eliminate the false advertising populating his format.
It'd be a good move for Zuck. I'd take the decade off if I had his money and youth. Too bad he doesn't have my brains.
Why not simply declare that they’re not posting any political ads (political defined by published, transparent criteria), deploy an aggressive and adaptive mechanism for user-published content? Hard to succeed in full, not hard to try. Then people can enjoy their videos of rabbits playing poker and self spat in peace. And stop posturing fb as a societal cure when it’s a crooked mirror.
Ahhhh. Thank you, Farhad. This article about the thoroughly awesome awfulness of Mark Zuckerberg scratched an itch for me. I feel so much better, if only for a moment.
FYI I've never used Facebook and I never will. But it has so much legitimacy from just about every outlet I can think of that I can't see its or Zuckerberg's power diminishing any time soon.
Scary.
"The Social Network" a decade ago confirmed my worst fears about Facebook's capacity for evil and how horrible and truly underhanded Zuckerberg is. Seeing the movie back then only confirmed my decision to dump Facebook early on and never look back.
Yes, he may not run prisons for hire or kill hundreds of thousands of people a year but his platform has become a threat to democracies none the less. One need look no further than the Rohingya crisis or for that matter any of the many elections that Cambridge Analytica has influenced to see evidence of the corrupting power that Mr. Zuckerberg holds.
I quit FB yesterday, then watched part of the Congressional hearing where he spoke today. AOC and Ms. Porter were fantastic. And that Democrat from Illinois, Mr. Caen?, he was very good.
I am against this Libra stuff.
Why shouldn't FB be regulated, and Google too. I did not appreciate his lack of transparency today. Was actually shocked.
Mark, your generation thinks "We're trying" is supposed to be enough. You need to "Fix it."
You might take a page from the NYT and hire several thousand people to check comments before approving them. In the meantime, the comments would not appear on FB, and some of them might be edited, or even better, deleted. Comments here are worth reading, even the ones with which I don't agree. Heaven knows you've got the money to do it.
You aren't old enough to remember the days when comments to the paper actually had to make it past an editor to be printed, and they meant something.
His selfishness, and general illiteracy of the world are so obvious.
He SHOULD go back to school. Take a course in Government; another specifically in the Constitution; and a few others.
His parents are such decent hard working people (his father was our family dentist for a decade) I don't know how they begat him.
Retirement is too good. An ice floe would be more appropriate.
1
Yes, please do retire! Amazon has become such a greedy acting company. Not the model we want to present to the children!
"I know we should be doing a better job." Every time he says this we know he is thinking of yet another way of doing something crooked to make more money.
"Like grains of sand, the tighter you try to hold onto it, the more it slips through your fingers."
I never know why these guys don't know when to quit. Is it ego? Can't they just let something go? You don't have to control the universe. Zuckerberg doesn't have to control all of social media. In fact, his life would be better, less stressful, more enjoyable, and ultimately more rewarding, if he just stepped back from the control tower, and let somebody else take the reigns. Otherwise, he's committed to going down with the ship.
Zuckerberg is a now a tool of the Russian state, and he is doing real, calculable damage to American democracy. Zuckerberg's ignorance isn't just hurting himself, it's hurting America, and democratic governments around the world.
Talk about something coming back to haunt you!
"I mean my God, Mark, where does all this end?"
Ha ha ha! Terrifically-written piece. Thanks.
Mark Zuckerburg is one of those great men who appear rarely in history. As is usual in these cases, the resentful people who make up much of the public hate him.
If you don't like Facebook then don't use it and you won't be exposed to whatever is posted on their site. Don't tell the rest of us who use Facebook that we are too dense to know we are being brainwashed by KGB ads. We can think for ourselves Thank You.
Stable genius appeared very unstable while he was on the hill testifying. Facebook must be drinking their own Kool aid. After he insults the American people that he has no responsibility for the content on the site political ads, hate speech. I dont know why he thought people would be glad to listen to him talk about hw he is going to destroy our financial markets.
Those fawning days are over, he hasn't fixed any of the issues with Facebook, he is wasting everyone's time, the world has real issues like the Kurds being murdered by another stable genius. Congress needs to take a page from the Europeans and understand how they are fining Facebook and what they respect from the CEO and stable genius that he is. Everyone else is his servant but he is taking your money with those clicks.
Mark Zuckerburg is one of the Great Men of all time. He has done more for Humanity than all of his detractors put together an multiplied by a million. We are seeing a cluster of petty and
jealous politicians making fools of themselves.
1
Break up Facebook!
Zuckerberg is determined to keep $$$ rolling in while he refuses to take certain basic steps to protect our democracy!
Facebook is essentially a publisher but without any relevant standards and practices which demand accountability and responsibility for the content on their platform.
Zuckerberg's net worth is over $60 billion. But no amount of assets should permit him to undermine our democracy.
Facebook started out as a dating and rating app when Zuckerberg was 20. Nothing he has done since then indicates he has grown and matured in running this huge worldwide company. He's still a spoiled 20 yr old determined to do whatever is necessary to expand and enrich his company.
Facebook is damaging our democracy without any accountability.
This is Mark Zuckerberg's fault.
For every thousand people who talk the talk, there usually is only one willing to walk the walk. Thus, many complaints about Facebook, Twitter, Google, and other corporate purveyors of lies and hysteria with few people actually disconnecting.
This is, unfortunately common behavior. Another example: why is there a large movement to boycott Israel but not China, whose oppression of Moslem Uighurs and Buddhist Tibetans is orders of magnitude worse than Israeli treatment of Palestinians? Again simple. Boycotting Israel involves essentially giving up nothing. Boycotting China would necessitate giving up one's cell phone.
The internet in general, including these pages, is God's creation for those who want to feel good talking the talk. The street is God's creation for those willing to walk the walk.
1
Zuckerburg is not introspective. He is also not vey bright and uses other people's ideas. (There are twins from Harvard that claim he stole the idea of Facebook from them). He is too deluded to realize the damage he has done. He helped manipulate the election in 2016 and is trying to do so again in 2020. Why else would you run patently false ads for the GOP? Yes, people should fact check and educate themselves. But this is one thing he has figured out- THEY DON'T...
The acknowledged credo of Facebook is "Move fast and break things."
Well, they certainly have succeeded in that!
They've broken the privacy boundaries of some 2 billion FB users. They've broken any semblance of security regarding the integrity of our electoral process. And they've broken their promises to clean up the mess -and institute significant changes - again and again...an again.
And now, while "moving fast" and continuing to break things, Zuckerberg went before Congress today to get talk about creating his own currency; a currency to compete with our monetary system.
He employed his usual slippery - either immature or manipulative - logic in declaring we must "keep up with the Chinese." ( I know a certain someone whom that will especially appeal to.)
Zuckerberg also proclaimed his love for this country.
Mark Zuckerberg, if you truly love this country - and recognize the damage your company has done - pledge to spend all your waking hours fixing what's been broken by you...
...and while you are at it, ban all political advertising on Facebook now through Election Day 2020.
Put your love of, and commitment to this nation...where your mouth is. You can move fast...and heal things.
i never liked the platform, and its creator is amoral creep. I will likely never visit it again. Haven't been on in months. Spreading political lies for profit is just evil. The man is a problem, and Liz Warren is the solution.
If I had Zuckerberg's money, spending time in Washington with these people would be the last thing in the world I would be doing.
Can't he hire someone to do this for him?
Having to be in a room and having to listen to AOC & Maxine Waters, you couldn't pay me enough.
Do the Democrats know Facebook has an off switch?
If your constituents don't like it, they can get off Facebook.
Do you think your constituents aren't smart enough to find the off switch?
1
My faith in humanity has been restored: Alexandra Casio-Cortez dressed down the arrogant, obfuscating Zuckerberg and reduced him to a bad haircut in an expensive suit. Touché!
It seems as if cream isn't the only thing to rise to the top.
Zuckerberg is on the spectrum, right? He's got a brain for data but no impulse for good social behavior. It's ironic he's running the world's most powerful social media site. God help us.
Just wait on time. I quit FB after one too many personal data breeches and have not looked back. Knowing that twenty somethings never really used it, along with the fact that FB cannot attract young users, gives some hope that it’s just a matter of time when current users leave the platform due to old age rendering MZ irrelevant. Meanwhile, the obscene greed continues.
11
All that money... he could do so much and instead there seems to be an arrogant, angry, vindictiveness to him. Sort of like Trump. I see now why he gave and continues to give help to Trump. Zuckerberg is dangerous and Warren is right - his company needs regulation.
1
It is not just Zuckerberg that is the problem. It is Facebook's business model. So even if the CEO takes a sabbatical or retires, the company will continue to wreak havoc. Break it up and regulate it as a utility. I do not believe Mr. Zuckerberg is intelligent enough to understand that his brainchild is evil. May be he is evil himself.
He certainly will fail and will be an embarrassment to his own company, because he is neither enough smart to act like a Fox nor strong enough to act like a lion. As Niccolò Machiavelli once said, one has to be both Fox and lion to maintain certain position.
I don't understand the fuss of Zuckerberg. His power is derived from users of his platform, all who voluntarily joined and many who now complain. What would happen if Facebook disappeared? Would you go hungry, freeze in the winter, die of thirst? FB users - you created the monster, and you can kill just as easy. If you don't like Zuckerberg, drop FB. For Pete's sake, pick up a phone, write a letter. If you must, text someone or send an email.
10
I think Zuck and the billionaires have lost sight of reality. Between the extractive design of our technological architecture and the outsized political influence that fortunes afford, this demographic is doing more harm to the integrity of the rule of law in the US than ISIS.
I'm a veteran and I was sent to war to fight for a free and open society. Not for the massive concentration of anti-democratic power on the dark side of a technological one way mirror. Lawmakers need to check these fools before active resistance becomes the logical conclusion. I don't know how much longer I can tolerate working for less than the cost of living. Please, you enlightened elite, wake up before the people who work need to find you in the night!
5
Mr. Zuckerberg, like him or not, has the absolute right to run his business as he sees fit, subject only to law.
If you dont like the way he runs his business, vote with your feet.
Where is it written that you must have a Facebook account?
5
He should resign. We already have Trump, we dont need another one in US.
Zuckerberg is trying to do this on the cheap.
When it comes to Washington you have to spend, spend, spend.
He is going to have grease a lot more pockets.
I would start with Maxine Waters and AOC.
I think you give too much credit to the Zuckerboy. Facebook has screwed up with out personal data numerous times and in a big way. They’ve lied about it.
Their advertising portal is perennially under development and often just locks up or leaves you with no button push to complete an ad.
I think the company is a one trick pony - everything else they’ve bought.
I watched some of his testimony today. My conclusion? Zuckerboy should be sidelined and definitely should not be getting into payments. The young man is in over his head.
3
Can’t see a control freak like him getting away from work. It may take a personal
crisis, and even then I’ve seen people double down- and doubling down is very much in his character. Never retreat, never apologize.
1
Plus: I never joined Facebook.
Minus: I won't be alive too many more years.
I don't think you are qualified to suggest that Zuckerberg should retire. Of course, he comes across as a robotic presence of his algorithmic platform, but you should be addressing the effects of that platform because he is one with it.
Zuckerberg has two basic options: save face or book.
If Congress could outlaw microtargeting in political ads, I bet it could go a long way in preventing the demise of democracy that Facebook seems to be ushering in.
2
I laugh when I hear Mark Z say it’s about free speech. It’s all about profits. Apparently FB needs so much more they can’t fact check or decline political advertising. I deleted my account.
12
I love Manjoo's columns. I don't always agree with him, but he always cuts to the heart of something. He's done it again.
The Times ran a good story earlier this week about how the rich are so driven that they cannot let go. A normal person should have some definition of when enough is enough. Give me $75 billion and I am history. My target number is so much less...and if companies still gave pensions I would already be long gone.
I fail to understand why anyone tolerates corporate life if they do not have to. If you are so driven that tens of billions of dollars of wealth are not enough, we are right to worry about you.
8
Mayor Pete has moved from progressive views early in the campaign to moderate, middle of the road views, now. Is it in part due to his high net work financial backers being in finance and silicon valley. I find the connection disturbing. Income inequality is significant. Threats to privacy because of Facebook are alarming. He at one time was pro Medicare for All. Now he isn't. Why has Pete moderated his views. Is it because of how he raises money. Have insurance companies and pharma contributed to his campaign. A story the Times doesn't cover. Perhaps the Washington Post will.
2
I don't understand hate so many readers express towards Zuckerberg. If one doesn't like what he is doing, cancel your account and be done with it. I find Facebook fabulous. I shared a bunch of Russian posts through Facebook for everybody to see. Facebook is an instrument to bring Truth to people, it became de facto instrument of Democracy.
2
Zuckerberg May be smart, but he’s only interested in making money and prolonging his Facebook. He’s not a well-rounded executive. Where else has he actually worked. He likely didn’t even have a job in high school or college. He’s not interested In democracy, not The USA. Not even the employees of Facebook. He’s got to go.
4
Full disclosure, never had a FB page, never wanted a FB page, have always been anti FB. I do not think I am exceptionally prescient, I just couldn’t understand the privacy invasion that most everybody seemed to be ignoring.
Zuckerberg was a man/child when he started this behemoth. He is also the very definition of socially awkward male human. How is it that it took over 10 years for people to see that maybe he wasn’t the best man for the job.
4
$$$$ = Coin of Our Realm
How dare Mr. Zuckerberg arrogate such power to himself an FaceBook?
We're all reading the United States Constitution more often these days. It is worth noting that Section 8 authorizes Congress to coin money and to regulate its value, whereas Section 10 denies states the right to coin or to print their own money.
Mr. Zuckerberg gives greed a bad name, when he creates his own digital printing press. Shame on him! Although FaceTime had a meteoric rise, it could fall just as easily once Americans realize the harm that comes with poorly regulated currencies.
3
The American obsession with celebrity, wealth, power and consumerism trumps (pun intended) having any discussion about self-sacrifice, patriotism, civic involvement or Democratic values. Zuckerberg, like Trump, is merely a symptom of a much larger disease. Voting is the only known cure available at the present time.
16
Mark Zuckerberg basically making the argument that it is ok to deceive the public, under the rubric of free speech. By extension, he, too, has the right to deceive the public. So, why should we believe anything he says ever again?
20
There are people in the world whose names I tire of hearing and reading about in the media. Mark is one of them. I agree with the article when it suggests he should consider taking the Gates approach and do philanthropic work quietly behind the scenes. Just go away, Mark. Just go away.
18
I also never was enticed by Facebook and still am not. Doesn't seem necessary or worth while to me and I am fine not having signed up for it.
14
One important point to add to the article: Zuckerberg owns a special class of stock with voting privileges that gives him complete control of the company. We should outlaw that kind of structure in public companies. Then at least there would be a chance that Facebook’s board could provide some adult supervision. As it stands now, they’re toothless.
14
I've never participated in the Facebook craze. Something intuitive prevented me from doing so. I don't regret it.
18
There's so many interesting things to do in life if you're just *sort of* affluent. If you're Mark Zuckerberg rich? You can literally do anything you want, especially when you're young and fit.
I'm kind of convinced that people who have Mark's kind of money and *don't* retire from their business to indulge in the many interesting things in life have some kind of psychological issue. There's something not right about a person with that much money not doing something else.
It'd be great if it was diving head-first into serious philanthropy, but even if it was yachting in Newport, skiiing in Gstaad, surfing in Hawaii or some other idle rich seasonal indulgence would seem normal. I can't think of one ordinary person who would decide to keep running a business like Facebook when they could walk away with a few billion dollars.
7
is AOC going to apply her Facebook expectations to cable political advertising as well as programming? Zuckerberg is no figure of sympathy, it if Congress is going to hold him to fact checking standards, then they will have to extend that scrutiny to all media......and themselves.
7
Zuckerberg built a business and then, due to his megalomania, greed and lack of ethical compass, let it turn from something positive to a tool for the corrupt and the enemies of the U.S.
Nuclear fuel is a great source of electricity, but it also can be made into bombs that can destroy the world. Unfortunately, tech behemoths like Facebook, Google, Apple and Amazon have similar characteristics—the potential for great benefits to society, but with a scary dark side that can more than overwhelm all of the good they do.
20
Manjoo falls into the same trap that has led to our celebrity culture, which is assigning credit to Zuckerberg for things he may provided capital for but he himself hasn't done in a while.
I run (manage) a small group of people in academia. It has varied in size over the years but it has gone as high as 30+ members (which is on the high side in an academic lab) and as few as just myself when I started off. I found the large number difficult to manage but I know some investigators who have 60+ members. Nonetheless, even in situations like these (where there's a lot of close direct supervision) I'd say the work is being done largely by the mentees and not by the head of the lab. The head may (if things are good) provide good ideas, provide some foundation of work that others can build upon, but most of the time they're doing administration, writing grants, etc. So they definitely help make the lab possible but they aren't the ones doing the work any longer YET when it comes to credit, they will get a good bunch of it. The best mentors will do their best to share the spotlight.
So I don't think Zuckerberg is really doing all these things you attribute to him.
3
If Zuckerberg retires, can he take FB with him?
What a biting and wonderful commentary, particularly given today's absurdities with "storming Republicans," a made for social media moment if I ever saw one...
I had a FB account for about 5 minutes. I did everything I could to delete it and have it erased from the digital universe.
Recently I started a small business.
Everyone tells me I "must be on FB."
Reluctantly, I went to see about re-opening my account.
From what I can tell, it was never closed.
I will not use FB, even if it means I cannot be the independent person I wish to be...
11
I resisted getting a FB account for a long time. I only signed up 2 years ago as a way of communicating with my family in Portugal and my friend who is teaching overseas. With all that is going on I’ve thought about cancelling my account but I haven’t yet.
However, I believe that Warren is correct. FB, Google, Amazon, Comcast and other companies are monopolies and have too much power. They need to be broken up and be regulated by the federal government!
10
They are monopolies because they are popular. Social media and internet commerce only becomes successful when they get a lot of users to generate sales and marketing revenue or increase scale.
If you split up Amazon or Facebook a winner would quickly emerge once the user rate on one platform topped the scale.
Americans have to be more informed consumers and users of this stuff. However, like voting and public policy, most Americans couldn’t be bothered to learn.
6
I had an account until 2014 which I canceled because I didn’t sign up to see how my account was cluttered with nonsense. I haven’t missed it once.
5
@M. Natália Clemente Vieira
Telephones? Email? Text messaging? Skype? FaceTime? Writing a letter??
Facebook is completely unnecessary to keep in touch with people. Did nobody stay in touch before Facebook existed?
Facebook holds so much power in this digital era. It is became both a platform for the thoughts of people and a platform for different propagandas of politicians.
Almost any typical person will say such thing that if they have that kind of wealth, the greatest move to do is retire.
But the question perplexes us. What does motivates him from not doing such action? Is it his never-ending passion for Facebook? Is it the feeling of power? Or — an extreme speculation — does he have any plans in using his current power to the extreme extent?
Facebook cannot be trusted anymore with all the privacy tragedies that happened that are still continually happening. It has now became a threat to democracy.
6
To offer a quote in support of this one. "With great power comes great responsibility" From Stan Lee’s Spider-man.
When Kara Swisher was asked about Zuckerberg's speech at Georgetown the other day, she had the perfect retort: "He should not have dropped out of school." The point being that in spite of his wealth and success, his thinking is shallow and he's not all that bright when it comes to addressing the serious issues that surround him.
69
@Phil28
What's shallow about refusing to be the arbiter of truth for political advertising?
Even if he had agreed that political ads need to be fact-checked, why would you trust Facebook to do that fact checking?
If you're going down that road, doesn't an independent body - a Ministry of Truth, if you will - make more sense to do that fact checking?
And why stop at political ads? Why not fact check every ad that's posted? Or every statement a user makes?
That’s what I’ve always thought. He’s an immature, not-fully-cooked billionaire. The idea of him as any kind of leader is...offputting.
1
@Phil28 Precisely. This is why a liberal studies education is important and not simply STEM knowledge. He has no understanding of civics or how the individual relates to the state.
1
I never understood the premise of facebook. I don't want anyone to know about me unless I want them to know about me.
25
@stewarjt I'd add that I know I'm not interesting and worthy of following. The funny thing is 99.9 percent of the human race isn't that interesting. Maybe I'm just getting old, but I thank the heavens for curated news in the form of the NYT, etc. Otherwise, I'd be stuck looking a friends' baby pictures and reading hyped version of their vacations. Yawn.
@stewarjt, the premise is bragging. The purpose is selling advertising.
The only reason that Zuckerberg has too much is because people all over the world use his platform. FB exists because people, apparently, love it. I don’t get the appeal, but whatever. If looking at the highlight reel of another person’s life is enjoyable to you, go for it. Just don’t complain that he has too much money or power. It could all go away pretty quickly by making a simple choice - no more FB use.
16
@Brian: Facebook takes the technical skill out of managing a personal website.
The difference between Zuckerberg and Gates et al is that Zuckerberg is a malignant narcissist that sees the Frankenstein’s monster he created as a misunderstood child in need of a little parenting and for society to be a little patient in the meantime.
That, and he’s in denial. Imagine he stops working, and truly reflects on his life’s work and the implications. Half of today’s headlines - including chaos in Turkey and Syria, the looming Brexit and potential dismantling of the EU, Trump and the failing of our democracy in the US - can all be tied directly to the metastasis of misinformation on Facebook. It’s not hyperbole to suggest that Zuckerberg may be the single most influential figure of our time, and is overall very much a net negative, when you factor in the effect his platform has on climate change.
For his own sanity, he will keep working. If he decides to take a break, he’ll be reading the paper on a hammock on his $100 million Hawaiian estate and it will hit him, what he’s done to the world. To some degree he knows, which is why he’s so set on fixing it, but for all of our sake, he needs to throw in the towel and admit that his baby has grown into something he can no longer manage, and that he needs the help of someone better equipped to contain and minimize the damage.
23
@Fed Up: At least Zuckerberg hasn't joined the billionaire's space race.
Mr. Manjoo: I am 68, from a different generation. I don't always agree with your opinions or reasoning, but in this case I have to say: your assessment is both very funny and absolutely spot on. I love it. Bravo! And thank you.
19
Ways to cut him down to size? When it defies consent decrees, breaks its word, fine Facebook amounts that will cripple or bankrupt it, not just wrist-slaps. Apply anti-trust laws to the maximum to break it up, as Senator Warren has suggested. Finally, repeal the section of the Communications Decency Act that exempts Facebook from responsibility for what appears on it. Facebook exists only because the federal government has failed to rein it in. Time to start. Better late than never.
27
The government pressuring Zuckerberg, YouTube, FaceBook and other social media, and also its surveillance of your social media posts shows that the First Amendment has proven inadequate in preventing government trampling on free expression, especially in the digital age where it deploys powerful software. The notion of the founders of the government that the First Amendment would prevent their creature from stomping on the free expression of the American people has failed again -- from the Alien and Sedition Acts to 20th century McCarthyism, and the HUAC, to the vastly more oppressive activities using powerful software to spy on society. The founders made their devil's bargain.
I strongly doubt that adding a constitutional amendment could protect free expression in the future - that would be like putting another band-aid on a spreading government.
4
@ML in NY Our government is necessary to protect the first amendment rights, but you're also right that it is the government (primarily SCOTUS) that has watered down the first amendment. The government isn't anything separate from us in a democratic society (we can argue about whether the US is one but let's assume it is). It is us. And we (i.e., society) has decided certain things are not worth protecting even though the banality of those things is why they needed protection. So for comfort and security we've traded this freedom. And yes, it began with the founders who helped write and support the first amendment to go turn right around and pass laws that prohibit speech.
The whole speech as action thing is where the concept of free speech breaks down but IMO, censorship is a slippery slope and so banning falsehoods that cause accidents suddenly leads to banning falsehoods period. I'm a free speech absolutist so I think Zuckerberg is right here. But he too is doing it out of convenience.
1
@ML in NY: People take it very hard when their free speech backfires. A well educated public laughs off fools.
Wonderfully snappy writing. Thank you.
7
I wonder if he’d be any different if he’d actually finished his degree at Harvard. I get “no need for college” for some jobs and Gates made a go of it — but also had trouble when it came to understanding what he’d wrought.
Maybe step back from day to day and enroll at Stanford and stick through an MBA or an advanced degree that would help him better understand his predicament.
10
@Mark H But, then he might learn something. Better to just 'wing it.'
That's what Trump does, and look where it got him?
@Mark H I doubt that.
Anything but education reform. We’ve had enough of those.
3
I may be over protective- disclosure, I'm a grandmother- but let me suggest the 2 year sabbatical. Even for we >60, 10 years is forever.
He is bright, capable, and apparently, malleable. He has matured over the past 15 years, but needs to step back and develop the macro view.
6
@Jeanne Justice seems his greed has matured
Once upon a time, or so they tell us, it was considered a virtue to be deliberate about one's speech. Measure twice, cut once was folk wisdom.
But the trouble with that attitude is that is doesn't provide a revenue stream. So now we've adopted the opposite point of view. If the results are disappointing, that's because we're going against millenia of better advice.
We have invented a new form of addiction, and it's a fountain of money like other such forms - alcohol, tobacco, drugs. Over many years we've come up with an admittedly imperfect approach to those other hazards to public health, a combination of government supervision and advice to individuals to avoid bad habits. We will have to the same thing with stupefaction via the internet.
3
Facebook should just refuse to allow political ads. It’s unlikely, though, because money.
15
@Marc Blank That's it. All he needs to do is eliminate political ads. But greed gets the best of him.
Zuckerberg and Facebook are the beachhead and staging ground for subversive social and political to undermine the will of the American people by Russian Intel. I believe Zuckerberg is compromised. People watch the Netflix doc, , The Big Hack. It exposes the current sophisticated level of the science of mind control that the Russians have perfected to disrupt. Divide and conquer is their goal. It’s an old cliché but very true. The technique is actually known as Psy Ops. It’s a powerful technique that specifically targets people whose personality data indicate they can be persuaded and they call such people, “Persuadables”. Just because no one is using physical weapons is no longer meaningful with the emergence of this this advanced level of sophisticated mind control that is actually considered a military weapon. It’s far more powerful than attacking a human being with a physical weapon when you can take over their minds.
The only people that would be capable of stopping these subversive activities against the American people would be Trump, McConnell who refused counter action, or Zuckerberg himself. Zuckerberg makes up excuses with the pretense that he is holding up the torch of free speech but it’s part of the subversive sham in my opinion. I think he’s doing it because he’s been compromised and he is one of the pawns in the game of Russian intelligence.
13
@rjay: US public policy that encourages belief without substantiation makes it exceptionally vulnerable to disinformation.
How has FB improved individual lives? Helped the average person buy a house, find true love, or improve family life? How essential is FB for ordinary life? Like air, or water? Has it had a negative effect on teens and kids, or a positive one? Helped them score big on the SATS, or think great thoughts? Make lifelong friends? Learn about morality? Has it helped society accept diversity? Does it make our politics more or less democratic? Just how "free" is that speech in comparison to speaking in front of City Hall at a rally for a particular cause? Is it more or less important than all the great books in the Library of Congress? That is what we need to know. The CEO is a CEO , not a social worker.
17
Can’t believe people are influenced that easy buy what they read on Facebook. For crying out loud it’s just a social media site where people and say what they want, when they want and to whom they want. It’s up to the reader to “fact check” and not the nanny government. Back in the day, we called it freedom of speech or freedom of the press.
10
@Alex Mazon oh please- facebook has become a platform of propaganda- you expect people to fact check? how much time do you have?
@Alex Mazon may suggest that you investigate 'subliminal'.
I remember when Microsoft went through a grilling 2 decades ago and people swore they'd quit Windows and Office and show them who's boss. It turned out to be nothing more than a shakedown by our govt and the EU. Billions were paid out, MSFT opened an office in DC and hired tons of lobbyists who bought the politicians and everything turned out alright for them. Same thing will happen here, and all the comments here are tales told by you-know-whos, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
4
What is it about people with tons of money who still need to be engaged in some kind of enterprise? If I had just enough money to squeak by on a budget I would quit tomorrow!
Eh, maybe I will anyway...
11
@John W it is amazing, the greed that accrues with money .
Facebook needs to be broken up. It's LONG past due. Microsoft was broken up for reasons that were innocuous compared to Facebook's impact on society. Zuckerberg's retirement would not solve the problem.
22
Terrific opinion piece. His company is a monopoly that should be regulated. Breaking up FB and Amazon would do a great deal for those trying to start up companies that could compete and bring alternative choices to everyone. That’s the type of capitalism we desperately need to increase wages and opportunities around the world.
13
I knew Facebook was trouble from day one so I've never had anything to do with it, or Instagram (also owned by Facebook) or any other social media. Zuckerberg should retire before he can do any more damage-he does not need more money. I do hope the Democrats win and start breaking up these monopolies.
43
It's not a matter of not being on those platforms. The problem is that huge numbers are, and they are the ones who are being earmarked and targeted with false political ads that others don't see. That is EVERYONE's problem and it will destroy our already-fragile democracy.
17
The Constitution of the USA was written by the founders to provide a balance of power between three branches of government in order to avoid the tyranny of the European system of royalty and kings. They never envisioned the current reality of corporate executive power. Mark Zuckerberg has more power over American life than most any elected official, and he was not elected by American voters into such a position of power. Therefore, his power and that of many corporate executives today is de facto un-American.
28
@D.C.
They envisioned the danger of centralized banks.
1
How did Dewey put it? The government is the shadow cast by business over society. Handing over such power to corporations and the very rich is as American as apple pie.
1
If you do not understand how Zuckerberg's extreme power is un-American, then you are ignorant of the prime purpose of the Constitution, which is to avoid tyranny by extreme power in the hands of any one individual or entity. Such tyranny is avoided by the establishment of and enforcement of a system of checks and balances regarding power over the people.
I just checked and I could not find any requirement in any state or federal code that requires one to have a Facebook account.
People who have accounts want to have accounts. And they are free. Of course the company should be transparent about what they do with your data, but then take it or leave it.
It is interesting that someone can post a review of my medical services online, and no matter how defamatory or false, the law does not allow me to sue the website owner- the publisher. I can go after the poster, but they are anonymous and the publisher does not have to disclose an ip address.
Why the double standard? Perhaps because Facebook involves the politicians who make the law?
39
@NY Surgeons
Simply because, print and TV are beholden to strict regulations as to what they can publish or air. While, the internet, one can do absolutely anything. Strange times we live in!
6
@apple95014
Political ads may be regulated on TV, but not for truth/accuracy, just accountability.
We do live in strange times... strange only compared to older times without electronic media. The wide reach and immediacy has transformed the country, often for the worse. But freedom of speech is a cornerstone of America. And to regulate the internet for content (other than inherently illegal conduct) stymies what makes America America. Let it roll, and let the consequences be what they are. Because that is the world we live ihn.
2
@NY Surgeons I'm so glad I was out of practice before online reviews. I would probably have needed either a restraining order or anti-depressants.
I can't agree with Mr. Manjoo that that Zuckerberg's product "doesn't kill...people" and doesn't "destroy the environment". By helping to elect, wittingly or not, the current administration in 2016, and apparently intending this time through willful ignorance to do the same in 2020, he and his 'product' have done exactly that. With freedom of expression comes responsibility; a principle that Zuckerberg conveniently refuses to understand.
77
@Ted Well said, I followed up with a similar comment.
Right. Maybe not an ‘evil genius’. Just a greedy one.
With Zuck, there is no 'there' there. His entire existence is defined by Facebook and his other two platforms. If he stepped back he would simply cease to exist. A very pleasant thought.
81
@Markymark And, that's exactly why he would never let go of his 'precious'...for without Facebook, he would cease to be relevant.
It's not like he's going to come up with anything actually innovative, anytime soon. Or, ever.
3
Mr. Zuckerberg isn't going to retire. Why? Because there's no way he's giving up all that power.
Yes, he gets criticized a lot. So what? Criticism is just words. Our government hasn't dared challenge the real power of Facebook, meaning Mark Zuckerberg. And unless someone like Elizabeth Warren is elected president, I doubt it ever will.
17
Facebook just fills some home in the system to fulfill a need. It’s easy to criticize Facebook, but if there were no Facebook there’d be some other company filling the same hole. The problem is choice. Consumers like Facebook and will use it for its benefits and may even disagree with what Facebook does as a company, but will still use it because they feel the benefits outweigh the cost. Also...if you don’t use Facebook and want to use another platform, what is it? Facebook along with other companies have gotten to large where they have become the standard go to. There is no choice in the market once choice is eliminated the company either needs to be broken up or regulated, almost like a utility company.
9
@Michael That's not a reason for them to be irresponsible.
@Michael I'm a 65 year old ex-network engineer who has lived a fun, fulfilling life without ever once logging onto social media........unless you call comment sections of the NYT social. Bottom line, you CHOOSE how to spend your time. People can choose to a non-virtual life, and have since the dawn of civilization.
1
Dream on. This man clearly wants to control the world. Even beyond the degree to which he already does.
15
@fmanjoo I really enjoy your articles. My only hope is that the subjects and stake holders in these topics are listening. Keep up the awesome work!
10
"No one man should have all that power". If that is the criticism, then wouldn't the solution be to seize them and implement some form of democratic control?
4
@Jordan
Unintentionally hilarious:
". . . wouldn't the solution be to seize them and implement some form of democratic control?"
But Mark is trying so hard to be like a real human boy. Emotions and convincing gestures are hard for him, naturally.
Where is the empathy for our replicant overlord?
39
This article is hilarious and also frightening! Awesome work!
11
If I had as much wealth as as someone like Zuckerberg I would sell the company, hire a tip tier financial services firm to invest for me and then take my annual investment returns and play, just get out and enjoy life instead of trying to grab more of the pie. Be a philanthropist, start a charitable foundation, travel the world like only the wealthy can, see all of the things that everyone wants to see but most cannot afford to.
I mean seriously, if you have a billion dollars and your investments get a modest 8% annual return that is what? 80 million a year? I will never accumulate that much in my lifetime. What sickness possesses these people that they can never have enough?
106
@arusso
Zuckerberg is currently valued at $69 billion.
The average interest rate for a savings account is 0.01%/yr
With that, admittedly awful interest rate, Zuckerberg would still take home a cool:
$6.9 million per year!
I'm pretty sure Zuckerberg could 'scrape by' on that. Doncha think?
8
@arusso
As soon as he does as you suggest, he's a nobody. No one will care any longer. He won't appear at hearings before Congress. He'll just be another guy with way too much money.
1
@arusso
Reportedly Mark Zuckerberg is worth over $60 billion.
It's obviously not about money for Mark Zuckerberg anymore.
He's a ruthless seeker of power and control.
Aside - Zuckerberg owns dozens of homes around the world. When he purchased his homes in Palo Alto and Hawaii, he purchased all the surrounding homes in the area (usually far above the market rate) and vacated them to ensure his complete "privacy" in some very crowded neighborhoods.
Zuckerberg cares about his own privacy. He doesn't care about yours.
Boy King.
8
He is certainly not living up to his responsibilities, which are very daunting. But he's probably doing what's best for his company, which is to take the heat and do just enough to keep the conservatives off his back. I'm sure he knows that our hopelessly divided government is incapable of developing effective new regulations. FEC, anyone?
I hope that at some point, Zuckerberg will change his mind or be replaced. Because the only effective controls over Facebook and the other social media giants are going to come from the companies themselves, or from competition (if that ever returns).
11
I'd like to go one step further and suggest that The Zuck takes the next SIX decades off--for the sake of Facebook users and for the sake of our country.
32
No one needs a Facebook account. We got by for centuries without it. And we didn’t have foreign governments funneling money into political campaigns without getting caught thanks to Facebook either. Do we really think we can maintain national sovereignty with this global network that does whatever it wants with no oversight?
76
@Corrie I use Facebook to keep in touch with my high school friends (I moved across country). No other social network has that. It's made a huge difference.
6
@David Konerding
How did people keep in touch before Facebook? There were many ways but they required that one take five or ten minutes out of their day to make phone call or write a letter. We don't even have to send photos any longer now that we have computers. Why would anyone post on Facebook when it's obvious there's no privacy?
26
@David Konerding I quit facebook a couple of years ago and went back to old-school methods of keeping in touch with my far flung friends. Email works. So do phone call and texts. It's entirely possible to do this without Facebook, and if you just try it, you'll soon find out you can too. You'll also find out which of those 30 friends are really ones you enjoy keeping up with, and which of those were interesting but relationships that you can let resolve in their own natural way.
4
Facebook is us. We are Facebook. Why do we yell at Zuckerberg for letting us be us?
Because in today's society those without get to shame those who have what they want.
14
@Pete :
if those who have what they want achieve that
by reckless or even perfidious means, i do think
they should be held very accountable.
i'm not facebook and FB isn't me.
i'm not motivated by in$atiable greed.
i do care about collateral damage my business model
might cause and i do think the way FB operates now
makes it a VERY real danger to democracy.
22
@Pete sorry, but if "we are Facebook," God help us.
Were I Zuckerberg, I wouldn't necessarily resign. I would take an extended sabbatical of, say, at least a year. Go somewhere where you can hide in plain sight. Read books, lots of them Enjoy your family . Simply be, . And then, after that time away, see if you want to come back to Facebook and re-engage.
In the meantime, Facebook should be run by an old-fashioned linear thinker, a middle-aged dude or dudette who can guide the company through its current whirlwind.
2
@Mark Siegel Zuckerberg already did that, he traveled around Iowa and other states going to small towns, truck stops etc to talk to the regular folks (so he says). He doesn't get a darn about regular folks at truck stops, so what was he doing in Iowa and other Midwestern states? Maybe considering a run for President?
8
@Jacquie During his speech on free speech, Zuckerberg sounded like a presidential candidate giving a stump speech or TED talk.
And no, that robot does not understand people.
4
I mean really stepping away and disappearing for at least a year.
I have a real problem with those who think Facebook should be regulated to remove political bias, but FOX news gets a free pass.
44
The issue is more complicated than that. On the one hand Fox News and other sources of propaganda (definitely mostly on the right but also a little on the left) have an extremely negative effect on our politics.
On the other hand, freedom of speech must be protected. That's the cornerstone of our democracy.
To me, the answer is more education. We need to teach students about how to identify reliable sources and about the cognitive biases that everyone is prone to that cause us to misjudge.
5
The problem is Facebook and the other social media platforms want to have it both ways.
Fox News is a media company, a member of “the press” and therefore protected from gov’t interference by the First Amendment.
However, being a media company also means bearing a wide variety of legal responsibilities and burdens. The FCC and other bodies can regulate. They are responsible for their content, including libel and slander issues. And we used to have laws like the fairness doctrine which dictated certain terms to broadcasters. Congress can regulate media in some ways—they’ve just chosen not to.
Facebook claims it’s not a media company. It wants no legal responsibility for the messages it transmits. It wants to be treated like the phone company—just a carrier of messages. At the same time, though, its whole business model depends on selling ads to run alongside all those messages, which is not at all how the phone company works.
Point is, it needs to be put in one bucket or the other. Be a media company and accept the kinds of regulations and responsibilities that come with that, or be a utility like a phone company and accept the regulations and responsibilities of that sector.
It can’t be allowed to go on having the best of both worlds and the limitations of neither.
13
@Joseph B
FOX is very clearly a right-wing medium, and they do not keep this secret.
Facebook was working with the right wing (via Cambridge Analytica and the Russian connection) and kept that completely secret. They also did not inform their users that they were being exposed to targeted ads with political purposes. Where was the fine print at the bottom of each ad "Paid for by the Republican National Committee, Treasurer John Q. Public"? When did they ask their users if they could give their data to a foreign company intent on sabatoging the US elections (and get the users' permission to do so)?
2
Delete your accounts people. I am 39 yrs old and have never had a FB account. My life is certainly not adversely affected in any way because of it. But it is adversely affected by all of you who continue to empower FB.
204
If you haven’t had a Facebook account you are not qualified to tell people to get rid of theirs. You have not experienced the stimulation and sense of community it promotes. If, on the other hand, you had a Facebook account almost since it launched and watched and felt its evolution from a fun way to let your friends know what you were doing to an all-mighty media empire you are qualified to say: life is better without it.
2
@T
From your words to the ears and brains of Facebook users. Seriously, well done in staying off this toxic site.
@T This isn't just a problem in America, anymore. This is a problem all over the world. Facebook is being used to incite riots, trigger psychopaths, and commit mass murder across the world. It's now possible to use Facebook to create chaos with a few simple keystrokes. Facebook has been effectively weaponized by terrorists and nation-states.
Consider just what happened this week in Bangladesh, when a social media post that offended Muslims caused a riot, and ultimately ended with four people dead. How do they know that the offending post wasn't created by a hacker, or a foreign troll army? Even if it was a legitimate post made by a real person, it's still a mass murder that Facebook helped facilitate.
Zuckerberg is now complicit in multiple mass murders. Social media is turning out to be a plague upon humanity. Sure, we could have social media, but should we?
Do we actually NEED social media? I know, I don't. We should have thought twice about how easy it was weaponize social media against us, BEFORE we let it do so much damage.
https://www.indiatoday.in/world/story/bangladesh-intensifies-security-after-violence-over-facebook-post-1611658-2019-10-22
1
Facebook, Twitter - two giant high tech companies whose currency is free speech. The distraught left becomes instantly uncomfortable with any narrative they don't agree with - and Zuckerberg and Dorsey refuses to please them. These are some of the last media organizations that haven't pandered to the left - and that makes me happy. I will fight for them to remain neutral arbiters of speech.
6
@bronx refugee Neutrality doesn't have to mean you let both sides lie and cheat while you take their money.
A paid political ad is not freedom of speech guaranteed by the constitution. If Zuckerberg really cared about free speech, he would let all politicians post ads for free.
@bronx refugee Facebook is an advertising and data analytics company, not a beacon of free speech, with digital products reaching into every corner of the web. Twitter seems more like a free speech zone, although they also make their money from advertising. I can see Twitter as more of a public utility since it's just delivering one product to everyone: Tweets. Facebook is nothing like a utility now and is simply a data sucking monster that I still use today, but for completely different purposes than back in 2004.
@bronx refugee
"The distraught left becomes instantly uncomfortable with any false narrative or conspiracy theory they don't agree with..."
There, fixed it for you.
I am guessing that Farhad did not watch the hearing today. Mark simply proved yet again that he is the smartest guy in the room - smart guys live for that.
That being said - I am far more comfortable for Zuck to be in charge of free speech than our good friend Farhad - who I am confident would be comfortable consulting his immediate circle of friends and censoring all manner of speech that hurt his particular sensibilities.
Mr Manjoo needs to refresh his recollection and appreciation of Mr. Mill.
"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~On Liberty J.S. Mill
37
@SteveRR I know you probably don't realize it, but the quote that you've provided pretty much proves Farhad's point about the enormity of power FB CEO has. Zuck has the ability to silence or, drown out with noise, any person or organization he chooses.
@SteveRR
Few today will understand Mill. And few will understand that quote.
After all, are we not subject in a proper democracy to majority rule?
Absolutely not when it comes to free expression.
1
@SteveRR
I'll take Mr. Manjoo over Zuck eight days a week.
Elizabeth Warren set her eyes on an allotropy in TECH, not exclusively FB. FB apparently is, not the ultimate target but a good example in attrition strategy. In a sense, FB seem to humbug users. So far, it is still the easiest way to get attention. People don’t stand amiss in basking spotlight. This gene cannot be modified. Actuality is, no TECH does not consider as humbug. Whenever people go online, they are exposed and data are collected in the automated system. Whether cookies are consented to be used or consents for readable permission, the users are stripped. Harvard business school researchers cover both prevention and protection. We cannot reign over TECH operation but we still can rein our behaviour. For example, think twice (coupon/free sample/sugar etc trap) before action. Zuckerberg might have more morality and control; his lobbyists in politics aren’t as many, dirty as in other TECH companies. (That’s why he is chewed.) He doesn’t brandish as much as money in attempting to waver how our government works, comparing to others. The ‘mega online shopping site’ owner is famous for dipping in federal policies and gaining his benefits and plan for becoming the emperor of the universe. (He has been talking of building a self-sustained planet in the universe. Believe it or not?) Has he been summoned to any hearing? Never. The situation is, whether Zuckerberg retires or not, it won’t be improved. Opposition and regulations are sabotaged by the aisle on the other side.
1
@Brigitte
We lived before Facebook we can live without Facebook. We lived with clean water and now we re learning to live without clean water. Maybe the money spent on lobbyist could be used to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure so we could have clean water again. Maybe we could have a cure for cancer, dementia .eliminate potholes. So many things we could be doing vs listening to Facebook tell us how to redo the financial system. Facebook fix your problems or just retire. We are all tired of him appearing on the hill and saying the same thing over and over again.
We spend a great deal of time giving money to tech companies for all of those great innovations that steal our privacy.
4
You and I are sensible people. I belong to a generation which used ICQ. I look at FB for my account or setting once or twice annually. We can have control over our behaviours. But not in most of the people who are screen addicted. Similarity applies to YouTube. It is not harmful to connect or get to know one particularly in interest. How the users utilize the engine and how it becomes a lucrative target are the crux. Lobbying is a practice. Infrastructure, medical developments need lobbying too. Budgets aren’t flexible. Balance among a variety of national affairs shapes a competition. I am a trans Atlantic person. The US has an inclination in lobbying comparing to other countries. Or is it another addiction? Overshoot is always the gist in this national phenomena.
@Tony I have never paid a dollar to facebook since it's free to use. It's free to use because our eyeballs are the product they sell to advertisers. And boy do they sell ads!
Just to be clear. The next decade. Not the rest of this one.
3
None of Facebook's issues will disappear if Zuckerberg leaves. If anything, they'll become worse.
While I have little respect for Zuckerberg, he at least thinks of himself and of Facebook as solving the world's problems (never mind that the problems Facebook has created are infinitely worse than the "problems" it was built to fix). Deep down, in some way, I think he's actually concerned with Facebook's social and political effects and, since Facebook is his brainchild, views them as his personal responsibility - or at least as a liability to his personal legacy. Perhaps there's hope that his personal commitments can turn the company around.
If he leaves, Facebook will complete its transition to soulless corporate behemoth that doesn't care about anything except its business mission. They'll hire a career-climber CEO whose only goal is to please the Board of Directors, and the company's ties to its idealistic origins (as faulty as those were) will be completely severed. To me, that situation would be even worse.
15
@M - Facebook wasn't designed to fix anything. The purpose of Facebook is to get more people using Facebook. And then to monetize their personal information. Rinse. Spin. Repeat.
15
@M
Stop using FACEBOOK suing the system is not working so what do you expect. If you have stage 4 cancer it is not going to get better. Mark is part of the problem and since he cant see the problems then he needs to go
@M Zuckerberg doesn't have a moral molecule in his body; this is all about money and power. He created a monster.
I haven't cancelled my FB account, but starting over a year ago I stopped visiting. I spent a grand total of about an hour on it this year so far, mostly to respond to direct contact by my friends and family there. I thought I would miss it, but I haven't; not even for a second.
If you don't approve of Zuckerberg's power, wealth or the way he runs the platform simply deny him the money that all those hours of feed digging every day give him. Cut off the oxygen supply, and use email and texting to stay in touch with your friends. Or pick up the phone and call, why doncha!
263
@Mikeweb You don't have to have a FB account for them to monetize your existence. If you use the web, they're selling someone information about your behavior. They're so embedded all over the web that while they may not be able to identify you by name, they can certainly differentiate between you and any other non-FB-user that they're tracking. You'll just see content that is ever so slightly less well targeted.
10
@DCW
That may be true, but their biggest income stream is 'clicks and eyeballs' and direct interaction with their platform.
If you're using the web, then *all* the big players (and their cookies) are watching and monetizing whatever they can.
12
@Mikeweb: Delete your account. Use Mozilla for your web browser and their free ad blocker, and use Duckduckgo for your search engine. It's probably not going to stop their penetration in your life as much as you'd hope, but it's a good start in slowing down the tech giants insatiable thirst for our data. Also use texting and emails, they both worked great before the social media evils started.
5
It's success in one area, plus Dunning-Kruger in other domains, plus a need to be important.
This guy was successful with a company, so he thinks he's a universal genius. He's not, he's just a guy with more money and power than sense.
But then what would he do if he quits? Read Thoreau and wonder if he's wasting his life and hurting humanity?
27
@vbering If Zuckerberg doesn'y know he is "hurting humanity," he is not as smart as everyone seems to think he is.
Maybe Zuckerberg thinks he's a good guy--he certainly wants other people to think so, but he is too consumed with money, power and stock value for his shareholders to spend too much time thinking about--and then doing--what's right.
Zuckerberg can't be trusted, and I would be very worried if he he gets his way with Libre.
If it "pays to hate Zuckerberg," it certainly doesn't pay enough.
51
@Rhonda As a Libra, I'm particularly offended by Zuckerberg's chosen name for his cryptocurrency. There's going to be unintended 'guilt by association.' And then, Zuckerberg is going to give my astrological sign that same icky feeling he gives everything he touches.
*shudder*
1
He can't possibly know any better, he's hardly an adult, he got lucky and now he thinks he can solve this problem. FB should be heavily controlled, almost like a utility, if this is even possible. It should be changed to a subscription system and users have easy and full access to controlling their data. Won't happen but it should.
31
What I don't understand is why everyone who has a Facebook account doesn't just cancel it - and let Facebook go bankrupt. I canceled my account years ago - and I'm not suffering one bit as a result.
282
@Amy Adams They wouldn't go bankrupt because they also own insta, whats app, etc. Even if everyone cancelled those they still wouldn't go bankrupt because you or someone you know agreed to let them track your data which they can sell (or i think mark says lease/rent) to other companies.
9
@Amy Adams I don't do much on Facebook. I don't post pictures nor log in every day to like others' pictures. But I do belong to 2 worldwide heath groups that are invaluable to my health and others. I cannot have access to this information and support on any other platform. So I boycott by logging on irregularly and only to those groups.
6
I haven't cancelled my account yet because I am using it to follow democratic candidates. but I've cut back all other use and will close the account after the election. I also never buy anything through Facebook ads.
5
The Second Estate was the aristocracy, which feels like the category billionaires would fall in to - no need to create the Fifth Estate.
8
Prosecution under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act certainly offers an applicable retirement package.
Why should it be up to Silicon Valley robber barons how to regulate themselves?
Why can't they (finally) be subject to the normal sort of regulation any other industry engaging in monopolistic practices, abusing the public trust and endangering public safety, deliberating trying to addict children and sabotate parenting, infiltrating public schols, corroding journalism, wrecking small retailers, corrupting politics and peddling dangerous products would be?
Break up Facebook, et al, as the illegal monopolies they are, fine their executives for violating campaign finance rules, and ban any capture and use of private data by such companies.
55
"Zuckerberg has become the Democratic Party’s newest political villain."
It's not a good idea to make light of a grave situation. Purveyors of lies like Zuckerberg are helping the effort to destroy the United States, and there is nothing whatsoever funny about it.
159
@polymath Exactly. Zuckerberg has buckets of human blood on his hands. Facebook is easy to exploit by hackers and rogue nation-states.
Russia has certainly done its homework, and knows the psych profiles of people that are easy to dupe. People like Zuckerberg lack humility, are incredibly naive, and thus, they make easy targets.
Zuckerberg is a now a tool of the Russian state, and he is doing real, calculable damage to American democracy. Zuckerberg's ignorance isn't just hurting himself, it's hurting America, and democratic governments around the world.
Consider just what happened this week in India, when a social media post that offended Muslims caused a riot, and ultimately ended with four people dead. How do they know that the offending post wasn't created by a hacker, or a foreign troll army? Even if it was a legitimate post made by a real person, it's still a mass murder that Facebook helped facilitate.
Zuckerberg is now complicit in multiple mass murders.
Social media is turning out to be a plague upon humanity. Sure, we could have social media, but should we? Do we actually NEED social media? I know, I don't.
Maybe, we should have thought twice about how easy it was to turn social media against us, BEFORE we let it do so much damage.
If you think the corruption is Zucks doing you are all being fleeced. He might be complicit, but the corruption in Big Tech is WAY bigger than Zuck. If you want Tech transparency look at Google... they are the biggest monopoly to EVER arise. It is now clear that they AND Facebook are attempting to manipulate the public in a level of social engineering not even conjured since Orwells 1984. Tulsi Gabbards latest dust up with the Clinton smear machine where Tulsi's media was CLEARLY suppressed is only the most recent evidence that Big Tech is doing its best to engineer society to it liking.
4
@Mystery Lits Ah, but Ms Gabbard is and has been a willing tool of authoritarians worldwide. And has been endorsed by David Duke.
She also was one of the most vocal Democrats in calling for the resignation of Al Franken, happily bearing a torch and pitchfork to suppress a genuine statesman.
23
“A man’s worth is no greater than his ambitions."
Marcus Aurelius.
This is why you and I are stuck in dead-end jobs and Mark Zuckerberg is not.
7
@Herr Andersson The question is: What are Zuckerbergs ambitions? It would appear that he wishes to pull chicks and rule the world. That was why he started Facebook in the first place.
5
@Herr Andersson
And, stealing your classmates idea ? Does ethics not enter your worldview?
For me, nothing speaks louder about Mr. Zuckerberg than the way in which he behaved and behaves in Hawai'i. He represents the "kind" face of colonialism. Yes, he abides by the laws, the laws of the occupier - without taking into concern the lives of Native Hawaiians, their mores and their feelings.
His taking up laws to fight to control in the sense of purchasing land that by tradition belongs to the Native Hawaiians and then naively stating that it is in accordance with today's law shows how little he knows or cares about his fellow humans.
48
@Robb Kvasnak
Zuckerberg has evolved his disceit, not his state of being. Zuckerberg is just a younger form of Trump, an 'evolved' con artist. Beneath the skin of Zuckerberg, there's nothing new to see here.
Zuckerberg is just a modern conman selling the same old...
1
Why ? So he can go around the world and destroy other places and indigenous peoples like he did on North Shore Kauai? He has no empathy or conscience. Probably make a great President of some third world country. I say with horror . Zuckerberg 2024 .
29
Have You Considered Retirement?
I wonder the same of some NYT oped witters, of certain Supreme Court judge, of certain speaker of the house.
Then I remember that just because I disagree with what comes out of the mouth, does not mean they should go away. As much as I would like to, I have to realize they too have a right to do the things they do.
Wish some writers realized the same.
19
Will he surprise? Will he remain to true to his own hubris?
I would bet on the latter. Mr. Zuckerberg, as with many of the top fiscal 0.1%, will likely continue to believe in his own intellect and his own boot-straps--as opposed to understanding how much luck has played into his financial and business success.
46
@JSK Luck and outright theft.
One big messy database that wasnt even his own idea. The advertisers will wake up after the sheeple wake up and stop using it.
1
@JSK: and stealing the Winklevoss's idea.
@JSK
And theft. He stole the Facebook idea from his fellow Harvard classmates. And, Harvard had had a “Facebook” in print for ages, they just forgot to trademark the name.
1
Facebook should be shut down immediately and for the next year until after the 2020 election, and then dismantled entirely as a business platform. FB is a proven "Clear and Present Danger", i.e. threat, to our democracy. Let the politicians use TV and radio ads for their campaigns, which are accessible and readily understood by voting age Americans. The dangers of advertising-financed digital media are not fully understood by either voters or arguably those tasked with securing the integrity of our elections.
130
@EJ
Facebook doesn't need to cease to exist - they just need to stop playing political ads. Their nonsense about incumbents being favored when no political ads are allowed is mountains less worse than false ads.
They don't need to monitor and police accurate speech if they don't allow political ads at all. And as FB king says: political ads are a very small part of their business.
The only way to impact their thinking is if we cancel our FB acct - already done for me.
5
@JK
Banning political ads doesn't deal with the issues regarding trolls, made up false news stories, foreign propaganda, etc., aimed at specifically targeted groups for the purpose of influencing them psychologically and/or to discredit legitimate individuals, groups, organizations et al.
And, since no one knows what happened to all of the Cambridge Analytica data regarding FB users that Zuck claims was stolen from them, no one except the thieves knows where that data is located, who is using it and how it is being used.
The situation is out of control, and all we really know is that the Russians and perhaps others are actively continuing to attempt interference in our election systems.
Shutting FB down and starting over making any successor company a legally responsible publishing platform responsible for its content, just as print publishing media are, is the only way to stop the current madness, at least for the time being or until a "better mousetrap" is invented.
4
@EJ
Funny. I think the same thing about CNN and MSNBC.
1