He built it, he kept his shares of it, it’s his.
If you don’t like using a platform owned by mark zuckerberg, you shouldn’t use it. He owns it.
If you don’t like using a platform owned by mark zuckerberg, you shouldn’t use it. He owns it.
It's utterly ridiculous that tech gets upset when someone they don't agree with uses their tools to accomplish something alternative to their ideas. This is the exact narrative the right uses to describe how hypocritical the left is.
That's quite the euphemism for subverting democracy at the hands of authoritarian regimes.
Is it Facebook? Is that because they aren't fighting fake news well enough? Is it because they are still accepting political ads without reviewing each one before it is posted?
Who do you want to put in charge of reviewing all posts on all platforms before they are allowed to be published?
What platform is doing better at this than Facebook right now?
Why, yes.
Traditional media has always fact checked political ads. If Facebook can't do it, that's a sign to me that they're too big to responsibly sell political ads. If Facebook is so powerful that too much power would reside in the hands of their fact checkers, that's a sign they should be broken up.
that line of thinking becomes problematic when the thing someone built becomes infrastructure within a society.
On face value I agree with you, no one should have their owned possessions taken.
That said, I don't believe that FB should have been allowed to accrue so much power as a private entity.
With that in mind, it makes sense that governments would seek to wrest such a power from private entities. 1) It's a massive national security concern, and 2) It's a massive global security and intelligence asset for those who own it.
What we need is proper regulation to prevent Facebook and similar companies from being nefarious.
With those regulations in place it wouldn’t matter whether Zuckerberg or someone else is in control.
I don't. But Facebook adversely impacts me anyway.