Facebook's Sheryl Sandberg: Chinese Tech Companies Are Also Powerful, and Will Not Be Broken Up (cnbc.com) 124
Facebook's Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg sat down for an interview with CNBC calling for regulation for American companies but pushing against the idea of breaking up the social media company. From a report: "You could break us up, you could break other tech companies up, but you actually don't address the underlying issues people are concerned about," Sandberg said. "While people are concerned with the size and power of tech companies, there's also a concern in the United States with the size and power of Chinese companies, and the realization that those companies are not going to be broken up," Sandberg said.
Diversion tactics (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Diversion tactics (Score:5, Insightful)
What a poor attempt at switching the spotlight to the Chinese. LOL! Was she wrong though?
I doubt she is wrong. The same market forces which make FANG companies consolidate will also make the global markets consolidate around a few "winners". Each country has a vested interest in their companies being those winners. Having their closest allies' companies win out is a decent consolation prize.
Having more competition in the US market place does have the potential to help US companies win over larger and less agile Chinese mega-corporations. So the flip side to this argument is that breaking up FANG could help us compete.
Re: (Score:2)
What are these "winners" winning and what are these "market forces" in this context?
You use these terms without any apparent understand of what the conversation is about. We aren't talking about products and competition here.
Re: (Score:2)
Having more competition in the US market place does have the potential to help US companies win over larger and less agile Chinese mega-corporations.
Are you basing this on anything other than racism?
Chinese companies are much more agile than American ones. [cnbc.com]
Basing it on the fact that smaller companies tend to be more agile than larger companies, so if US mega-corps were broken up they would likely be more agile than Chinese (or any other country's) large mega-corps. No racism involved, but good try.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, this was an attempt to politely demonstrate that what your country and your people have identified as being correct and just is not workable in the global economy: and you can't change it, you can't escape it, so fuck you right up the ass.
Facebook is not the only company that delivers this message periodically.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, she is very, very, very wrong (but, at the same time, very, very very right). Here's how:
The U.S. can break up any company it so chooses, because its citizens have enormous spending power that matters to every giant company around the world. The U.S. orders Chinese Company to break up according to whatever criteria the U.S. chooses. Chinese Company has two choices: comply, or cease doing business in the U.S. Chinese Company will be broken up. End of Story. So in this regard, she is completely and
Re: (Score:2)
The U.S. can break up any company it so chooses, because its citizens have enormous spending power that matters to every giant company around the world.
I think you're thinking about contract manufacturers like Foxconn that make things that are rebranded and sold in the US. However, there are many large Chinese companies that have almost no exposure to the US market as a seller, like Huawei, Alibaba, Tencent, etc. Rather, if the US has any leverage, it's in the supply side, such as threats to prohibit US sales to ZTE and Huawei. However, the Chinese are quite aware of this vulnerability and have been frantically trying to replace US products with substit
article summarized (Score:2)
Article Summarized:
Cheryl Sandburg, notorious Corporate Progressive nazi and Deputy Chief Commisar of semi-official surveillance agency Faceboot, issues public bloviation:
"Faceboot is obviously evil. However it may not yet be as big, intrusive, and evil as its Chinese counterparts. Help us make Faceboot bigger, more intrusive, and even more evil!!"
"You need us to fight the Chinese" (Score:4, Insightful)
"You know, when we're not selling out to them."
but they will still be managed... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
The sad part is that they shouldn't be broken up, but for entirely different reasons than the ones she gives. The cure for a monopoly isn't several broken fragments of a monopoly that cannot function in isolation, nor is the cure for a Chinese monopoly an American monopoly. The cure is competition.
Unfortunately, the people calling for "breaking up the tech monopolies" generally don't understand technology, and thus don't understand that their approach won't work.
The reality of the world is that everyone
Re: (Score:3)
I mean, if FB was split into three services (call them FB classic, Instagram and WhatsApp), it's possible all three could thrive in completely different markets (US/EU, young people, Asia/South America, respectively), and not be a monopoly.
It's also possible that if FB classic was split into 5 companies by law (with a year of warning) they would voluntarily implement a federation solution to avoid risking being stuck at the 80% of the companies that lose in the war. Then, you just have to mandate that it's
Re: (Score:2)
In theory, yes. In practice, no.
For Instagram, the main problem is that young people aren't a good target demographic for ads, because they don't spend nearly as much money as they do after they group up and get jobs. And when they do that, they'll find that all their n
Re: (Score:2)
And they'll create a FB account like they do a LinkedIn, to network for business. But their socialization will still happen on Instagram or Snapchat. Partially because showing off party pics not to your coworkers is a feature, not a bug. And partially because that's where all their friends they give a shit about (HS and college) are. And partially because that's what all the friends they meet their age will be.
Source,
Re: (Score:2)
That's what they *say* that they do. And that is, in fact, what they tend to do at first. But over time, network effects erode that base, and the older they get, the more they actually end up just using whatever tool can reach the most people. I've seen it happen enough times to enough social networks to assume that it will continue to happen over and over again. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
I think what's happening is that the people you assume have "eroded over time' are just older and never were that out of FB's reach. I think no 20-year-old really wants to see what their 50-year-old boss did over the weekend
I'm not sure what "many times to enough social networks" you're talking about. It's been 15 years since FB started. There really only has been time for Instagram and Snap to take off. And they both seem fine (userwise, if not revenue wise)
Re: (Score:2)
Both Vine and Twitter were popular with the teen crowd at times, and much less so now (and Vine is completely dead). And Snapchat very nearly bought the farm; it remains to be seen whether it sticks around. I feel like I'm forgetting at least one or two other minor ones.
Re: (Score:2)
"Hey, look over there!" (Score:5, Funny)
Re: "Hey, look over there!" (Score:2)
We want American evil defeated so we can effectively take on China evil.
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting.
Entertaining; stupidity is only interesting to the stupid.
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting.
Entertaining; stupidity is only interesting to the stupid.
No, it's interesting. Interesting in that Facebook seems to think they've won to the point where they don't even need to pretend anymore.
silly story (Score:4, Insightful)
What else did you expect her to say? Why should we pay her any attention? Company executive spouts self-serving talking points, news a 11.
Re: (Score:1)
One has to wonder why they even bother though. It's bullshit, they know it's bullshit and so does everyone else, so it's just a huge waste of time. The only purpose such crap has is to show how little respect they have for everyone - including themselves. They'd be better off just putting a sock in it.
Ok... (Score:5, Insightful)
Lately, it looks like the way we deal with problematic Chinese countries is to simply ban them from doing business in the US.
Maybe Facebook would prefer to be subjected to that treatment instead.
Re: (Score:2)
Lately, it looks like the way we deal with problematic Chinese countries is to simply ban them from doing business in the US.
Maybe Facebook would prefer to be subjected to that treatment instead.
I know you're being sarcastic, but Facebook is indeed subjected to that treatment -- in China.
Though she didn't clearly raise this point, I have to think that's at least part of the undercurrent: a U.S. company would end up hobbled in both the U.S. and China, while comparable Chinese companies would continue to operate freely in both countries.
She's right! (Score:4, Insightful)
She's right! We can't break up Chinese companies.
But we can, and should, break up Facebook.
Two totally different things.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
We should send Facebook to China. Win/Win.
Re: (Score:1)
But we can, and should, break up Facebook.
Why? Are they blocking your internet?
Re: (Score:2)
Into halves is fine. Sand, Zucker, Berg and Berg.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because they're large enough and insidious enough to hoard data about every man woman and child in the US (and most of the world for that matter)
Because they have little to no oversight in how that data is stored, used or sold.
Because they have proven on numerous occasions to abuse the public's trust in regards to privacy
But honestly, the answer isn't to break them up; but prohibit collecting (without EXPRESS, OPT IN CONSENT) the type of data that is their stock and trade.
Will that happen? of course not. T
The American rush for Sina Weibo accounts? (Score:2)
Is she worried that if broken up they're suddenly going to be losing users to Sina Weibo?
US Government vs China Governement (Score:1)
The companies are just an extension of the Chinese government over there. Our companies have way too much freedom and power. Sorry, you are getting broken up, the government here finally sees you as a threat. You should be giving back to the people isntead of wasting all of our money on whatever you deem fit.
yep (Score:4, Insightful)
Big companies love being big, and they love regulation.
Facebook, being big, can cope with (or compromise) whatever regulation you throw at it.
An upstart competitor? Not so much.
Re: (Score:3)
Or better yet, there's a good chance they will be involved in writing said regulation.
She is "full of it..." (Score:5, Insightful)
"While people are concerned with the size and power of tech companies, there's also a concern in the United States with the size and power of Chinese companies, and the realization that those companies are not going to be broken up,"
So she is saying that her company should continue to misbehave by flouting American Law, and expect that getting broken up or "weakened" to a degree, will never be on the table because others in distant lands will otherwise become too big?
This lady should emigrate to an island and enjoy her millions there.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, lets copy China (Score:4, Insightful)
Sure, there are some things that China does very well and may be worth copying. I hear they have a great beer chicken dish.
Creating big-brother tech companies however is NOT one of the things we should be copying.
Obviously the restrictions that cause big tech to be broken up should apply to all foreign companies that want to enter the US market as well. Level playing field within the US, etc. yadda-yadda. (Let's not pretend US big tech has ANY chance whatsoever in the Chinese market.)
Re: (Score:3)
Let's not pretend US big tech has ANY chance whatsoever in the Chinese market.
Let's talk about chance. As far as internet and hi-tech companies are concerned, almost all Chinese internet giants -- Alibaba, Baidu, Tencent, ByteDance, etc. -- were backed by western [sequoiacap.com] venture capitalists [sbcvc.com] and are all registered in the Cayman Islands [seekingalpha.com].
The manager staff [of eBay] were from Germany and United States. Consequently, there is a language barrier and insufficient understanding on the local market [marketingtochina.com]. Concerning Taobao, which can be considered as a competitor they managed to hire Chinese people to handle the business. These people could understand in the best way the Chinese culture. Actually, the name of the platform has a significant meaning which means to dig for treasure. Even thought Ebay tried to adopt a Chinese name it was not as catchy as Taobao one.
Never attribute failures [marketingtochina.com] and incompetency [nytimes.com] to malice.
Re: (Score:3)
"Creating big-brother tech companies" is not exactly something the US market had to "copy" from China. It's wild how almost every reference to China's own pervasive surveillance state nowadays is made as though we didn't, just a few years ago, have proof of the US's *global* surveillance apparatus, as though somehow this shit was invented solely by the Chinese, something the Land of the Free must guard diligently against because we don't do that here. The NSA literally has their own wiretap rooms in corpora
Re: (Score:2)
...there are some things that China does very well and may be worth copying.
Their copying??
Which chinese company (Score:2)
Chinese companies might be big inside China but none of them have the power of the big US tech giants (Google/Facebook/Microsoft/Amazon/Apple) outside China.
When is it the last time you have used Alibaba or Baidu? One of the few with international success is Huawei and they are being blocked.
Re: (Score:2)
I've considered buying something at aliexpress. But there's actually very little I actually need that is significantly cheaper there or that I can't even buy here, without waiting weeks.
And it's really hard from the pictures and descriptions to say if you're actually getting quality merchandise or just cheap shit.
But then, I'm old-fashioned and actually like to touch stuff before I buy it.
Evil.... YA! (Score:4, Insightful)
Sheryl, when my kids we 2 and 3 years old and they did something wrong they tried the "well, Tommy can do that..." , the answer was always, "you're not Tommy, and this isn't Tommy's house".
You're a friggen adult, Sheryl. That argument does't work for 3-year-olds, it doesn't work for FB. Grow TFU.
This argumentation is absurd (Score:3)
"Also, CCP will still be in power in 2024 when Trump leaves. So clearly, we should change our system to ensure that Trump is a president for life to compensate!"
How desperate must one be to go down this insane rabbit hole? Is she really that empty on rhetoric as to why Facebook shouldn't be broken up?
Re: (Score:2)
This is question the "free traders", "Open borders", and "free capital movement" folks need to answer.
American's as rule still value their freedom many of them don't seem to accept that certain limits on their freedoms to do things cross border like send capital in and out of the country in unlimited amounts; off shore labor, levels us open to exploitation by people who don't share our values.
They also mistaken assume the rest of the world is populated with rubes. The Chinese are not stupid they are every
not even subtle (Score:3, Funny)
I think the title should be:
Whataboutism: The interview
In order to defeat china, We must become china. (Score:2)
Isn't that what they are saying?
What's America's excuse? (Score:3)
Why am I punished? (Score:2)
Bubba did the same thing and his parents didn't punish him.
That stupidity alone is grounds for breaking the suckers up.
Sandberg's first-lesson masterclass (Score:2)
[Points at older sister] But she gets to have a bicycle!
[Points at younger brother] But you didn't smack him for stepping off the curb!
The second point underlying this communication is the first lesson from early adulthood: size matters.
No really, it does. If at first you don't succeed, get a penis pump.
Once you get your treasured penis pump, hold it close, because how could you possibly succeed in life if your neighbour possesses a penis pump, and you don't?
"Whatabout-Ism" snore (Score:1)
Cheryl is basically taking a page out of Kellyanne Conway's playbook: the "whatabout-x" strategy. weave, dodge, bob... Mohammed Ali would be proud of today's politics. Wave a glove in the air to your side! SNORE.
Just sounds like (Score:2)
Facebook has some good points, but over all I sure do not see any use beyond being an easy way to share family pictures with the extended family only.
And I sure don't see why businesses are using it. But time will tell if Facebook is something people can't live with out. ATM that sure seems true.
But my thoughts are just mine. Heck I don't even have Facebook, LinkedIn or Twitter accounts and I am doing just fine with my b
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know what your business is but your lack of FB, LI, TW use makes me want to contract you already.
Whataboutism FTW (Score:2)
Whataboutism is a propaganda technique first used by the Soviet Union, in its dealings with the Western world.[1] When Cold War criticisms were levelled at the Soviet Union, the response would be "What about..." followed by the naming of an event in the Western world.[2][3] It represents a case of tu quoque (appeal to hypocrisy),[4] a logical fallacy that attempts to discredit the opponent's position by asserting the opponent's failure to act consistently in accordance with that position, without directly r
America is not China (Score:1)
Here we encourage healthy competition and go after and break up monopolies where we can. At least we're supposed to. China is a communist dictatorship.
Shitter (Score:2)
Yeah . . . but (Score:3)
Yeah . . . and the CCP gets to do all that forced human organ harvesting, and WE DON'T!!!!!
Yeah . . . and the CCP gets to hack into the Pentagon, OPM, all those defense contractors, and WE DON'T!!!!
It's ALL just soooo unfair . . . .
And how the hell is that relevant to anything? (Score:2)
Is Facebook planning to go to actual meatspace WAR with a Chinese company? If not, then who gives a crap what their size is relative to a Chinese company?
Or are the recognizing that social media companies are exploitative and are trying to say that Americans are better off being manipulated and exploited by an American social media apparatus instead of a Chinese one?
Apples and Peanuts comparison (Score:4, Insightful)
It's not even apples and oranges. The technology companies she's comparing Facebook to are tech-tech, they produce hardware and software.
Facebook is a "tech" company in the same way as broadcast media is a tech company. They both use hardware and software to make and distribute their product but the products aren't "tech" (or even software).
We need to stop referring to social media as "tech", it's media.
Yes, mod parent up! (Score:3)
Furthermore, Zuck even said his goal was to make facebook become the internet, replacing what most people do online. All without him just saying openly that his goal was to do AOL again but this time succeed.
Facebook hasn't replaced everything to the point it's killing it. The social media space is new and not exactly a real thing anyhow. It's other areas where they can crush competition that should be monitored but they don't have a real industry they have that kind of power.
What should be considered is o
Shame (Score:2)
Ironically, the push in the west to break them up is the same force keeping the Chinese firms whole -- politicians wand kickbacks and other skimming from the corporations, one by acting as mafia protector, the other as mafia protector in the "shame if something gets...broken" sort of way.
Shame if your company gets broken...up (mumble mumble mumble.)
Follow the money and ignore the meme surface rationales.
I can't help but wonder (Score:2)
if Huawei would agree.
Maybe not an anti-trust lawsuit, but we're not without some ability to influence things.
They could be made to spin off their US business (Score:2)
Make it illegal for companies larger than a certain size to conduct consumer-facing business transactions on the Internet in the US.
The overseas giants would have to spin off independent competitors.
False equivalency (Score:1)
Just because someone else does stuff just as bad or worse, does that make Facebook's atrocious behavior OK?
China sets a very low standard to look up to.
The Chinese don't care about facebook (Score:2)
The problem with breaking them up? (Score:2)
Now, instead of ONE shitty, two-faced, censorous piece of shit company hoovering all your data, you have MULTIPLE shitty, two-faced censorous piece of shit companies, all with identical outlooks hoovering your data.
And nothing is any different.
Out of touch with reality (Score:2)
Classic whataboutery from Facebook's PR machine. Somewhat negated by the repositioning by Trump of China as a military and economic enemy to be destroyed. Who cares what China's businesses are doing, any third country buying from them will be subject to financial sanctions. Facebook is clueless and dangerous.
False dichotomy (Score:2)
We don't have to play nice with hostile foreign powers.
I double Dares YA (Score:2)
Facebook is a cancer on society, it's driven my unethical and amoral people who have an overinflated sense of their own importance.
DO NOT BREAK UP FACEBOOK
Re: (Score:3)
Shorter version: nevermind us, there's a bogeyman out there