IS FACEBOOK, ZUCKERBERG A “BAD ACTOR?”
Is Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook, behaving like a “Bad Actor?” Facebook proved that it is a commercial giant. Facebook has proven to be a major facilitator for an expanding group of “bad actors” around the world. The Facebook brand is suffering major trust issues with its social media community. While CEO Zuckerberg releases carefully worded press releases, investigators have exposed the company for letting foreign “bad actors” meddle in the 2016 presidential campaign and a massive subscriber abuse, 50 million subscribers, and a privacy breach used by the Trump for president campaign.
The Facebook brand is suffering real perceptual issues around trust, integrity, accountability, journalism, and mean-spirited behavior. Elon Musk isn’t the only one pointing to a movement of #deletefacebook
What does Facebook have in common with the BP Gulf oil spill (British Petroleum)? Nothing, they both did harm to our environment, but BP spent $61.6 billion to answer for its egregious error. Was Mark Zuckerburg alarmed that Facebook was the primary technology used to influence voter sentiment in the 2016 presidential election? To date, Facebook’s actions don’t instill confidence. Zuckerberg’s public comments fall somewhere between an inexperienced CEO and a “slick” operator.
When Facebook wants to compete with an opposing threat, it brings out the resources to dominate the competition. When Snapchat burst onto the social media landscape, Facebook tried to buy its new competitor- Snapchat turned down multi-billion dollar offers to purchase the start-up. Snapchat didn’t agree with Facebook’s valuation of Snapchat, so Facebook launched Instagram. All in all, smart move. This post isn’t challenging what Facebook could do. The social media giant has opted to use it vast resources to: 1) Turn journalism into “fake news”. 2) combined credible journalism with a tabloid mentality called “click bait.” 3) Opened the social media network open to “hate” speech and “bad foreign actors.” 4) Let a third-party political research company have access to the private information of 50 million subscribers.
Rest assured the federal government has tried to convince Facebook to clean up a mess that the company helped create using self-governance. However, Facebook isn’t placing ethics as a high priority over commerce.
The Facebook’s newsfeed changes proposed by Zuckerburg was nothing short of a public relations strategy to deflect accountability by saying Facebook would cooperate with Congressional inquiries. Mark Zuckerberg’s idea to turn the editorial decisions over to local news outlets is a misdirection move, slight-of-hand.
First, Facebook proclaimed to be just a technology platform, not a journalistic content creator. However, if Facebook allows its technology to manipulate elections, is America in danger of letting a free-speech debate hurt democracy? To be clear, Russia is only interested in doing harm to the American way of life.
Congress just used its power to essentially block a foreign acquisition of Qualcom for reasons that relate to China’s interest in dominating the global smartphone industry. Is there any doubt that China wants to dominate the United States?
For the first time in American history, our presidential election was sabotaged by a foreign “bad actor.” What has Facebook done to prevent election tampering from happening. Nothing.
“I care deeply about the democratic process and protecting its integrity,” Facebook’s chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg.
The announcement that Facebook would share the advertisements used by “fake” accounts with the Senate and House intelligence committees came after the social network spent two weeks on the defensive.
The strongest argument from Facebook management was that some of the “fake advertisements” ran after the election too so the sponsor’s motive was most likely something other than influencing the election. This either naïve or a manipulation.
Facebook required a subpoena to turn over files requested for a congressional hearing. In response to “fake news”, Facebook has said it will hire human beings to review content and advertisements.
If Facebook’s claims of really not being capable of correcting the manipulation of its technology, the government needs to step in. The Federal Communications Commission has spent decades updating rules of political advertising.
On sponsorship identification, the FCC focused on third-party ads, requiring that broadcasters make an inquiry as to the complete set of executive officers or the complete board of directors of any sponsor.
Facebook has bent over backwards to find ways to get its technology into China. China’s demands prove that Facebook can use its limitless technology capabilities to play within China’s rules. Free speech is not challenged by a law that says you can’t go into a theater and yell fire as a prank. Facebook is a massive “theater” and someone is yelling fire to disrupt the governance of the United States. For that and its continued inaction to avoid future incidents in political elections, Mark Zuckerburg and Facebook look like, and act like, “Bad actors.” Are we going to see a repeat of tampering similar to 2016 presidential election? It is going to require more action than moral indignation.