"while hardly noticing that a literal genocide was being coordinated on their platform in southeast Asia."
Was this a decision or simply a lack of resources for that area.
Was this a decision or simply a lack of resources for that area.
It's fine to note that they are both bad and both mean culpability and liability, but pretending they are literally the same thing is the worst kind of rhetorical device.
When Sri Lanka pulled the plug on Facebook as violence was starting to erupt, Facebook did then reach out...to ask why their Sri Lankan traffic had dropped off.
This is documented in a variety of places, but for an excellent write-up of these tragedies I'd recommend The Chaos Machine by Max Fisher.
1. Facebook wanted or didn't care at all that a genocide was going to happen and happened
2. Facebook cared to a reasonable extent but due to an american centric setup isn't prepared to censor posts in certain areas of the world
Bad? Yes, evil? No big difference