Mark Zuckerberg Says Facebook's Goal is No Longer To Be 'Liked' (cnn.com) 86
Mark Zuckerberg sent a message to the public on Wednesday: Facebook is fine doing things that are unpopular, as long as people understand why. From a report: Facebook has come under scrutiny over its political advertising policies, as fellow social media platform Twitter decided to ban political ads. "One critique of our approach for much of the last decade was that because we wanted to be liked, we didn't always communicate our views as clearly because we were worried about offending people," Zuckerberg said on a call with analysts. He said his goal for the next decade "isn't to be liked, but to be understood." That's because in order to be trusted, "people need to know where you stand," Zuckerberg said.
Trusted? (Score:5, Interesting)
No one trusts Facebook.
Facebook won't make a dent in that fact until Zuckerberg retires.
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Swing and a miss.
Voting blue, voted blue last time.
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
And a lot of good kowtowing to cancel culture and politicians did, when they are lined up around the corner from both sides of the aisle to cancel section 230 or otherwise jail people who say, or allow to be said, things the politicians don't like.
These are the legal problems facebook & friends are facing.
1. Loss of 230 protection
2. Jail for hate speech (should get tossed, but that politicians even bring it up is scary as shit)
3. To paraphrase Terry Jones (RIP) from Monte Python, "Shame if your company
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Trusted? LOL! (Score:5, Informative)
Mark Zuckerberg Says Whatever He Needs to to Deflect Criticism.
This is what's really going on with anything that begins "Mark Zuckerberg Says...". They don't even need to change the headline, just keep reusing that and then quote whatever it was Zuckerberg said this week.
Re:Trusted? (Score:4, Insightful)
Facebook won't make a dent in that fact until Zuckerberg retires.
Why do you think that a suit that will replace Zuck will be any different (or even not worse)? FB core business is the issue, as long as they are in this business they will keep doing bad things to privacy.
Re: (Score:3)
That's very fair and more to the point of what Shaitan was saying below.
My point was to the opposite of Shaitan's. The general appearance of Facebook will never be trusted while Zuckerberg is at the helm, he is the running joke of an emotionless robot who started Hot or Not and got rich.
No matter what Zuckerberg is saying about trusting the words they are saying, regardless of the morality of those words, even if they are holding true to those words, if Zuckerberg is at the helm, the general appearance of F
Re: Trusted? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Trusted? (Score:5, Funny)
Facebook wants to be liked less and trusted more.
They are halfway to their goal.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What Facebook is trying to do is shift itslef from FAD social media to serious communications business PR=B$ image. They are trying to alter the public appearance of the company whilst doing exactly what they are doing no, mining everyones privacy in order to target and manipulate them, in a very psychologically damaging fashion.
To be honest still on Facebook with your family members than you are a bloody idiot and a really, really, shitty parent, a real moron parent, selling out the psychological future o
Re: Trusted? (Score:1)
"No one trusts Facebook.
Facebook won't make a dent in that fact until Uncle Sam and/or the EU curbstomps them into 50 separate companies."
FTFY
Re: (Score:2)
Mission accomplished! It's super-effective! (Score:5, Interesting)
Zuckerberg leaving Facebook isn't enough. Facebook needs to die, it's become a cancerous tumor of the Internet. I don't see anything like enough 'good' Facebook does humanity versus how much harm it causes. That's reason enough to destroy it utterly. Of course I feel the same way about the vast majority of so-called 'social media'. We were overall better off without it, as a species.
Re: Trusted? (Score:2)
Facebook won't make a dent in that fact until Zuckerberg retires.
Facebook won't make a dent in that fact until Zuckerberg is arrested and convicted. FTFY
Trust and you will be trusted, said the liar to the fool.
Re: (Score:2)
It will be hard for to get adverting revenue if users stop using their services.
The real problem I see it is like the Microsoft Problem 20 years ago.
You don't like the product, however you have too much invested in it to switch.
Facebook has been managing much of our (as a collective population not us readers per say) communication. With Friends and Family. Ditching Facebook also means loosing these connections until we come up with an other way that everyone agrees to use. We can be that guy who refuses to
Where's the laugh track? (Score:2)
The laugh track is in your routerz (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Zuck sounds like an actor on a B-grade comedy show with obnoxious laugh track in the background.
He does seem rather non-self aware, eh? Really Mark, that's what you think will fix Facebook's image problem?
Fair enough (Score:4, Insightful)
Their policy with regard to political ads/news is actually a good one. It doesn't matter what Facebook's motive is, Zuckerberg's argument is correct. Having tech companies be the arbiters of truth or any corporations that are gatekeepers of information is a horrible and horrific idea.
Unfortunately when any group that controls a lot of power stops caring about appeasing the people altogether like this it usually is bad news. Whether it is a powerful company or a government it is bad news when it no longer fears the electorate and acknowledges its existence is a function of their sufferance. For government that is the citizens or the people and for Facebook that is the users.
As for trust I don't think he means what others seem to be trying to trust. He is indicating your trust that Facebook can be taken at their word, not your trust that their motives and actions have any sort of positive motivation. When Facebook/Zuckerberg routinely tell you their rational in brutally honest fashion with no regard for whether or not you like it, you'll be more likely to believe that a neutral or positive rational is true since they obviously can't be bothered to sugar coat it if it weren't.
Re: (Score:1)
Wish I could mod you up.
There's not much else to say. Pretty much closes the thread.
Now we have to remind ourselves that all of Facebook's [and the government's] power comes from us, and that only we can fix it.
Re: (Score:2)
Now we have to remind ourselves that all of Facebook's [and the government's] power comes from us, and that only we can fix it.
No it doesn't, and no you can't.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, actually it does. The military is a bunch of us, the banks are filled with us, dollars only mean anything if we decide they do, the courts are filled with us, jails operated by us, without us Zuckerberg runs out of coffee and gas.
Re: (Score:3)
With biased media that is targeted to trap you into segmented group think classifications, we make the best decisions given the information to which we are exposed.
Here I'll fix it for you with a historical German perspective:
The military is a bunch of us, the banks are filled with us, marks only mean anything if we decide they do, the courts are filled with us, concentration camps are operated by us, without us Hitler runs out of methamphetami
Re: (Score:1)
In many ways we are NOT like computers.
Here I'll fix it for you with a historical German perspective:
The military is a bunch of us, the banks are filled with us, marks only mean anything if we decide they do, the courts are filled with us, concentration camps are operated by us, without us Hitler runs out of methamphetamine and gas.
Yeah, and? Who would the man be without "dutiful citizens"? Sorry, people don't have to take info at face value. Otherwise they would be no better than the computer. Fascism is a
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. All day they push the message that with modern technology resistance would be futile. Who guards their missiles, bombs, artillery, who drives the armored vehicles, the jets, the bombers? We do, our children do, our siblings do. Not only that but they swore an oath to defend the Constitution and the People.
Re: (Score:2)
Historically most of the people of Germany only opposed the Nazi party AFTER they fell but they made the story retroactive. Also there were Germans who did resist, saving lives and undermining the Nazi efforts in many ways.
Look, reasserting our power means doing the hard things. It means not just risking consequences but walking into them. It means fighting back when the government imposes on freedoms for tracking, encryption, etc that might be used by terrorists because fighting back might mean those very
Re: (Score:2)
We can take back our government and conversations like this is one way we move forward. In order for that to happen, we all need to understand what we are up against and getting solid facts IMHO is going to be a major obstacle.
Re: (Score:1)
Why? You can't just absolve yourself with simple hand waving.
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty much yeah. When you do things just because they are popular, but you have to be coerced into it, you are signalling that you will subvert those values if you can avoid the scrutiny. You will do other things you have not promised to not do.
When you tell people what you do and don't believe, they make a decision: can they tolerate you or not? They don't worry about what you might not be telling them.
That's basically how my own communications decisions operate: if something is irrelevant in a pra
Re: Fair enough (Score:1)
But the censors will save us from ourselves.... DENIALIST!!!!?!!!1!!
Re: (Score:1)
I interpret this as:
We don't care if what's posted is blatantly incorrect, dishonest, illegal, or unethical. We won't do anything about it because we don't have to and we don't have to care to have to do anything about it.
The First Amendment with an ultra-libertarian and anarchical standpoint trumps any sort of decorum, societal norms and mores.
We are going to be 100% completely honest with you, the Facebook member, we don't care about you, what you think, or anything else about you - other than to find a
Re: (Score:2)
"The First Amendment with an ultra-libertarian and anarchical standpoint trumps any sort of decorum, societal norms and mores."
Of course it does. It is best if the people who have to ultimately make the decisions do it on the basis of an uncensored feed and that is the voters in a democracy. Otherwise the bias of the gatekeeper taints the information. Ethical is up to the person interpreting that information, societal norms and mores are relative and should be based on untainted (to the degree possible) inf
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
"As it stands we're each getting our own bespoke bullshit filled echo chamber"
Yup and the answer to that lies in embracing those you oppose and who oppose you and having dialog not handing the keys over to a gatekeeper who can define our realities and echo chambers for us.
Re: (Score:2)
[Emphasis mine.]
I'm gonna have call bullshit on that. Facebook was like that before you ever heard of them. In fact, I think a supermajority of businesses are like that, it's just that Facebook happens to be a particularly unattractive and unfriendly one
Re: (Score:3)
Having tech companies be the arbiters of truth or any corporations that are gatekeepers of information is a horrible and horrific idea.
Yeah except Facebook needs to at least keep their space pleasant and inviting enough for people to stay in and that may require some moderation. If I went to a restaurant to have a nice time with my family and friends and someone came over to our table uninvited to tell us their deep-state-black-jews-orchestrated-9/11-to-distract-the-world-from-a-chemtrail-poisoning-operation-and-only-Trump-can-save-us manifesto, and I can no longer enjoy my time with my family and friends, then I would expect the restauran
Re: Fair enough (Score:1, Flamebait)
"went to a restaurant to have a nice time with my family and friends and someone came over to our table uninvited to tell us their deep-state-black-jews-orchestrated-9/11-to-distract-the-world-from-a-chemtrail-poisoning-operation-and-only-Trump-can-save-us manifesto"
Haven't yet experienced, thankfully. But I have far too often experienced drunk Euro-peon tourists at bars downtown. Who usually want to start the conversation with a vigorous and uninvited denunciation of America, free speech, and dissent view
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What other social media platform would you migrate to and how confident are you that you can get your family and friends to migrate with you?
First, Let's not assume one must be on a social media platform. To use the restaurant analogy, if there is only one restaurant in town people can still eat at home and invite their family and friends over.
Second, I know many friends and family who moved all their activity to Instagram because of the nonsense on Facebook. And, yes, everyone is aware Instagram is owned by Facebook, but the platform/interface is different and doesn't lend itself to to be used [or abused] in the way Facebook is.
Re: (Score:2)
We already live in a world in which what gets aired or published is at the ultimate discretion of the platform owners. It is already like that for a scientific journal, a newspaper, or a cable TV, just to cite a few examples. So that is already the status quo. Facebook also rejects users posts that do not fit with their policy (but other rules currently apply to paid ads).
I for one wouldn't mind if the company that owns a platform did a basic screening (according to transparent rules) on what gets published
Re: Fair enough (Score:1)
I, for one, find your words hateful and offensive. CENSOR IT!!!
Re:Fair enough (Score:5, Insightful)
"Having tech companies be the arbiters of truth or any corporations that are gatekeepers of information is a horrible and horrific idea."
Heard this for years on Slashdot, but it's really not true.
I know this'll make the kooks on Slashdot like you shit bricks, because I'm going to use the G word, but TV news in the UK is regulated by a government ombudsman such that they can be fined and forced to apologise for misinformation, or even taken off air. Meanwhile the UK print press is free to do what it wants, entirely untouchable.
Despite this, the well regulated UK TV news offer far superior, far better, far more insightful news, whilst the press is full of nothing but lowest common denominator populist lies.
So much so in fact that it was entirely down to the likes of Channel 4 news to expose major stories like the Jimmy Savile scandal, the BBC to expose the Iraq dossier that massively embarrassed the government at the time, and so on and so forth.
So um, yeah, regulation of news sources is neither horrible nor horrific, if done well as in the UK it actually drastically improves the content; it means you don't have to deal with shit like Fox News, it means there's an obligation to tell the truth rather than simply to tell the most outrageous lies to get views.
There's absolutely zero evidence that leaving the tech industry to do what the fuck it wants on this front has improved the quality of news, on the contrary, the evidence to date is that lack of regulation for sites like Facebook has done nothing but severely damage factual news telling, and in fact, democracy itself. The only people who seem to want this hands off approach are, unsurprisingly, the people who benefit from it, and right now that's primarily the far right, because they're entirely dependent on lies to spread their ideology.
Re: (Score:1)
They already are gatekeepers: They ensure that violent killing and kiddie porn aren't available for consumption. But in principle, yes, information should be unrestricted.
I'm not asking them to be arbiters of truth: I'm asking them to distinguish between (recognized) facts, claims, opinions and stories, like most news-providers do. I'm demanding that Facebook stops their non-factual claims of containing News.
Facebook refuses because they want money from the political right who, between non-factual cl
Translation (Score:4, Informative)
Well THAT was easy (Score:5, Insightful)
Mark Zuckerberg Says Facebook's Goal is No Longer To Be 'Liked'
As long as he's listing goals that he in fact achieved 15 years ago, he can add "Want to fuck up the world" and "Become the living embodiment of profit-at-any-cost".
Re: (Score:3)
Bullshit. All social media (including Twitter, which is a fucking cancer) does is expose us to the idiocy of our fellow man. Don't blame the conduit, blame the people using it.
Social media is a glimpse into what a country of 'True Democracy' would be like and it's a scary one. Any system which allows us to express ourselves online to each other will have the same dire consequences.
Re: (Score:2)
There is much, MUCH more wrong with Facebook than just exposing user idiocy, amigo...
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, FB sucks, but it also depends how you use it (and I agree with you about Twitter). I joined to track my kids in their late teens, and ended up reconnecting with many old family and friends (scattered around the world), including several I'd lost track of 40+ years ago. I've actually met up with a bunch of them in person again. I don't share much, but then, at 61 yrs old, I don't much care if FB knows some factoids about me. I just wish we had European style privacy rules...we let them get away with
Re: Well THAT was easy (Score:1)
Down with democracy! The masses are too STUPID and DEPLORABLE to rule themselves. They don't _deserve_ self-government. Us smart, wise, well-connected people can help these poor rural idiots to think and vote the _right_ way in the next election! Aristocracy forever!?
Re: (Score:2)
People need to know where you stand (Score:5, Informative)
Zuck: Yeah so if you ever need info about anyone at Harvard
Zuck: Just ask
Zuck: I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS
[Redacted Friend's Name]: What? How'd you manage that one?
Zuck: People just submitted it.
Zuck: I don't know why.
Zuck: They "trust me"
Zuck: Dumb fucks
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:People need to know where you stand (Score:5, Informative)
Translation (Score:4, Insightful)
I got the money, now fuck you!
Re: (Score:2)
Goal? To be liked ... (Score:4, Funny)
Success (Score:4, Interesting)
Aaaaand (Score:2)
Logo? (Score:1)
Remember when Zuck wanted to be president? (Score:1)
All those really corny "meeting with regular folk" videos he made?
Facebook will never be liked or trusted.
"isn't to be liked, but to be understood." (Score:2)
So Almost Nothing Is Changing (Score:2)
These are certainly interesting times. Governments and corporations have witnessed the complacency that has taken over our society and while they've been taking advantage of it for the past several decades, they're at the point where they don't even have to pretend that their motives are pure. They know that we will suffer them because we're
Facebook is Trustworthy (Score:3)
We can trust Facebook to collect its users' information and history of behavior, and sell access to users, based upon this information and history. It is restrained only by the most minimal of ethical considerations, and mostly to avoid government regulation. We can trust Facebook to leverage personal, often private, data it collects to enrich its shareholders and stakeholders, unencumbered by any sense of responsibility to the societies under which it operates; even as it often undermines those societies by profiting from the proliferation of libelous, slanderous and false information.
We should not confuse trust, which is the confident expectation of something; with benevolence, responsibility, ethical behavior or respect for people.
There is not much to misunderstand. Facebook will continue to collect more personal information, find more ways to profit from it, up until the point where it is forced not to, either by regulation or desertion of its userbase.
Good job (Score:2)
"Mark Zuckerberg Says Facebook's Goal is No Longer To Be 'Liked'"
Well, mission fuckin' accomplished, because most people I know hate Facebook*.
-
*Facebook lovers need not reply telling me how great it is; I don't care how much you love your data-sucking vacuum.
Nobody likes me anyway =( (Score:2)
So I now have 1 less thing to worry about in my miserable social media life.
We don't like your lies and no one ever liked you! (Score:2)
Well we don't like your lies or how you handle our data. How arrogant, no one ever liked you in the first place! Guess that is why in 2019 60% of my friends dumped Facebook and the other 40% are really thinking about it. Generation Z doesn't even use Facebook none of them do.
Re: (Score:2)
Facebook is for old people.
PR manager? (Score:3)
We liked the old internet (Score:1)
Freedom of speech, freedom after speech...
Funny how new social media cant be like the old web... what's the extra special difference?
Political censorship.
He Is Down With Being Hated (Score:3)
I reckon. I used to think that Bill Gates was the perfect villain, but Mark Zuckerberg has him beat. Does either one own a Persian cat? (People only wear monocles ironically these days.)
Goal Achieved (Score:2)
Now fuck off.
Mission accomplished, I'd say (Score:2)
Or, put another way, I own the goalpost so I move it wherever I fuckin wanna!
Blurry Lines. (Score:2)
The problem is bigger then Facebook, but Facebook is the biggest provider of the problem (not the creator)
1 We have Facts: This is what happened and this is what they said in entirety
2 We have expert opinions: Someone who is in the know of the situation, who will help interpret the facts and forecast the outcome.
3 We have public opinion: This is the persons gut ration to something
4 We have propaganda: Which we are trying to change public opinion, also to see if you can change the expert opinion.
5 We have li
Zuck knows the game, (Score:2)
"It is better to be feared than to be loved, if you cannot be both."
mirror, mirror at the deep end (Score:2)
If Zuck wanted to convey sincerity from the get go, he could have taken at least one large bite out of a decade of arrears in telling us what Facebook really stands for.
But he didn't, because Facebook wanted to sit back, score, assess, suss-out, and chew the fat internally on the optics on Zuck's first exploratory toe-dip into the chilly swimming pool, before he decides his next move.
Mirror, mirror at the deep end, who's the biggest shrinknad of them all?
100 Years of Hemlines [youtube.com]