>Because Facebook has multiple figures in leadership positions that supported Trump. Thiel vocally, Luckey surreptitiously.
Thiel isn't in a leadership position at facebook (de facto or de jure - he's a board member who doesn't take a day-to-day role) and Luckey is about as marginalized as you can be within a company while maintaining contractual agreements. The real leadership of facebook seems genuinely progressive. Also, I'm not sure some employees supporting a mainstream politician is grounds for the company to be shaken up or disbanded (49% of voters supported Trump!).
>Because Zuckerberg believes the fake news his platform elevates played no part in the election ... Because Facebook’s core product promotes the distribution of false information
Nate Silver largely agrees: https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/802272157954781185. And sure maybe it had some impact, but so did 50 other things going on. I'm not going to defend fake news and I think it's harmful to the election process and facebook, but this isn't a strong argument against facebook as a company.
>Because Facebook shipped a racist feature in its core advertising product.
A huge amount of advertising is targeted racially in a non-controversial way. This is a reality of advertising and I don't consider it racist. Facebook has made it clear it does not tolerate the illegal or discriminatory use of this feature.