14 Years of Mark Zuckerberg Saying Sorry, Not Sorry (washingtonpost.com)
Do you trust Mark Zuckerberg? The Washington Post: From the moment the Facebook founder entered the public eye in 2003 for creating a Harvard student hot-or-not rating site, he's been apologizing. So we collected this abbreviated history of his public mea culpas. It reads like a record on repeat. Zuckerberg, who made "move fast and break things" his slogan, says sorry for being naive, and then promises solutions such as privacy "controls," "transparency" and better policy "enforcement." And then he promises it again the next time. You can track his sorries in orange and promises in blue in the timeline by The Washington Post. Mark Zuckerberg, in an interview with CNN Business on Tuesday: Zuckerberg resisted growing calls for changes to Facebook's C-suite, reiterated Facebook's potential as a force for good, and pushed back at some of the unrelenting critical coverage of his company after a year of negative headlines about fake news, election meddling and privacy concerns.
"A lot of the criticism around the biggest issues has been fair, but I do think that if we are going to be real, there is this bigger picture as well, which is that we have a different world view than some of the folks who are covering us," Zuckerberg told CNN Business' Laurie Segall at Facebook's headquarters in Menlo Park, California. "There are big issues, and I'm not trying to say that there aren't," he said. "But I do think that sometimes, you can get the flavor from some of the coverage that that's all there is, and I don't think that that's right either."
"A lot of the criticism around the biggest issues has been fair, but I do think that if we are going to be real, there is this bigger picture as well, which is that we have a different world view than some of the folks who are covering us," Zuckerberg told CNN Business' Laurie Segall at Facebook's headquarters in Menlo Park, California. "There are big issues, and I'm not trying to say that there aren't," he said. "But I do think that sometimes, you can get the flavor from some of the coverage that that's all there is, and I don't think that that's right either."
their business model is not sustainable over the long term, but they have had a great ride. Even though some would argue Facebook and the other consumer social media sites are not absolute necessities and as individuals and businesses figure that out they are in deep trouble.
;)
The real niche I see for them are private family web sites so to speak for keeping in touch and grand kids pictures. Everything else is just fluff that is trying hard to pose as having value so Facebook can continue to mine and sell private personal and business information to any one willing to buy it.
The best thing Zuck could do right now! Is sell and take cash and head in to the hills laughing all the way.
But then I have never had a social media account, well at least on any of the normal(useless) consumer sites so maybe I am completely out of touch.
Just my 2 cents
True. And, they may be right!! See also, "I want to invest in the housing market in 2008". If enough people do a dumb thing, the government sometimes makes it not dumb retroactively.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
It's incredibly ironic that the right seems to think that government can do no good and that corporations can do no harm..
WHAT THE FUCK? Republicans, as a party, have always been anti-trust (anti monopoly). The Sherman Anti-Trust Act was signed into law by a Republican president. I don't dispute that Democrats are anti-trust as well, but to imply that Republicans don't think corporations can become evil is fucking laughable.
Republican platform, 1900 (William McKinley v. William Jennings Bryan):
“we condemn all conspiracies and combinations intended to restrict business, to create monopolies, to limit production. or to control prices; and favor such legislation as will effectively restrain and prevent all such abuses, protect and promote competition and secure the rights of producers, laborers, and all who are engaged in industry and commerce.”
Republican platform, 1940 (Wendell L. Willkie v. Franklin D. Roosevelt):
“Since the passage of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act by the Republican party we have consistently fought to preserve free competition with regulation to prevent abuse. New Deal policy fosters Government monopoly, restricts production, and fixes prices. We shall enforce anti-trust legislation without prejudice or discrimination. We condemn the use or threatened use of criminal indictments to obtain through consent decrees objectives not contemplated by law.”
Republican platform, 1972 (Richard Nixon v. George McGovern):
“We will press on for greater competition in our economy. The energetic antitrust program of the past four years demonstrates our commitment to free competition as our basic policy. The Antitrust Division has moved decisively to invalidate those “conglomerate” mergers which stifle competition and discourage economic concentration.”
Republican platform, 1976 (Jimmy Carter v. Gerald Ford):
“The Republican Party believes in and endorses the concept that the American economy is traditionally dependent upon fair competition in the marketplace. To assure fair competition, antitrust laws must treat all segments of the economy equally.”
Republican platform, 1980 (Ronald Reagan v. Jimmy Carter):
“All working men and women of America have much to gain from economic growth and a healthy business environment. It enhances their bargaining position by fostering competition among potential employers to provide more attractive working conditions, better retirement and health benefits, higher wages and salaries, and generally improving job security.”
Republicans generally are in favor of becoming rich / wealthy. Hard to do that if you can't even get your business off the ground because of crippling regulations and/or some fucking monopoly.
So yeah, they mistrust government AND abusive corporations.
By the way, it was that ASSHOLE Bill Clinton that removed all the limits on media ownership in this country and handed our radio/tv stations to just a handful of corporations. That wasn't Republicans... That's about the worst possible monopoly you could have... The very industry that's supposed to keep an eye on government (the press) is controlled by just 3 or 4 companies that have the ability to deliver to 99% of Americans (broadcast radio and broadcast tv)..