In 2008 Zuck was a media darling. In 2018 he was a media devil. Was this because he changed? No. It's because Facebook's growth made it more attackable. I'm not saying Facebook is perfect. Just that you can conclude nothing from the trend in articles attacking it.
-
-
You seem to be saying the same thing I am – that Facebook's size brings more scrutiny – but with the addition of snark and emojis.
-
The constant sense of grievance for very powerful people you air on Twitter is over the top. Even Facebook internally takes this pretty seriously. They get annoyed at coverage but it also helps people internally justify their asks for more resources on these problems.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
They arguably had that power by 2011 with the Arab spring as a counter argument.
-
That point doesn’t change this argument at all.
- 6 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I don’t think introspection is a strong point here...
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It is weird that
@paulg makes such an absolute statement in the face of this rather self-evident point.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Great point! Because of Facebook’s scale and potential to harm society, its responsibilities to society have increased but it’s still behaving like it has no responsibilities beyond profit maximization.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
And is he not dealing with it? NYTimes coverage of Facebook is not journalism - it’s called a hit-job.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
Sorry it’s just different when you run a 2 billion person network that can influence democratic elections or add to sectarian violence.
Sometimes you just got to put on your Big Boy pants and deal with the heat.