The more outrageous the lie, the better it is for Facebook’s bottom line'" [Los Angeles Times, 9 Novemer 2019]
Wednesday 13 November 2019
Mark Zuckerberg called to account in Sorkin open letter
The more outrageous the lie, the better it is for Facebook’s bottom line'" [Los Angeles Times, 9 Novemer 2019]
The
New York Times, 31 October 2019:
Mark,
In
2010, I wrote “The Social Network” and I know you wish I hadn’t.
You protested that the film was inaccurate and that Hollywood didn’t
understand that some people build things just for the sake of
building them. (We do understand that — we do it every day.)
I
didn’t push back on your public accusation that the movie was a lie
because I’d had my say in the theaters, but you and I both know
that the screenplay was vetted to within an inch of its life by a
team of studio lawyers with one client and one goal: Don’t get sued
by Mark Zuckerberg.
It
was hard not to feel the irony while I was reading excerpts from your
recent speech at Georgetown University, in which you defended — on
free speech grounds — Facebook’s practice of posting demonstrably
false ads from political candidates. I admire your deep belief in
free speech. I get a lot of use out of the First Amendment. Most
important, it’s a bedrock of our democracy and it needs to be kept
strong.
But
this can’t possibly be the outcome you and I want, to have crazy
lies pumped into the water supply that corrupt the most important
decisions we make together. Lies that have a very real and incredibly
dangerous effect on our elections and our lives and our children’s
lives.
Don’t
say Larry Flynt. Not even Larry Flynt would say Larry Flynt. This
isn’t the same as pornography, which people don’t rely upon for
information. Last year, over 40 percent of Americans said they got
news from Facebook. Of course the problem could be solved by those
people going to a different news source, or you could decide to make
Facebook a reliable source of public information.
The
tagline on the artwork for “The Social Network” read, in 2010,
“You don’t get to 500 million friends without making a few
enemies.” That number sounds quaint just nine years later because
one-third of the planet uses your website now.
And
right now, on your website, is an ad claiming that Joe Biden gave the
Ukrainian attorney general a billion dollars not to investigate his
son. Every square inch of that is a lie and it’s under your logo.
That’s not defending free speech, Mark, that’s assaulting truth.
You
and I want speech protections to make sure no one gets imprisoned or
killed for saying or writing something unpopular, not to ensure that
lies have unfettered access to the American electorate.
Even
after the screenplay for “The Social Network” satisfied the
standards of Sony’s legal department, we sent the script — as
promised over a handshake — to a group of senior lieutenants at
your company and invited them to give notes. (I was asked if I would
change the name of Harvard University to something else and if
Facebook had to be called Facebook.)
After
we’d shot the movie, we arranged a private screening of an early
cut for your chief operating officer, Sheryl Sandberg. Ms. Sandberg
stood up in the middle of the screening, turned to the producers who
were standing in the back of the room, and said, “How can you do
this to a kid?” (You were 26 years old at the time, but all right,
I get it.)
I
hope your C.O.O. walks into your office, leans in (as she suggested
we do in her best selling book), and says, “How can we do this to
tens of millions of kids? Are we really going to run an ad that
claims Kamala Harris ran dog fights out of the basement of a pizza
place while Elizabeth Warren destroyed evidence that climate change
is a hoax and the deep state sold meth to Rashida Tlaib and Colin
Kaepernick?”
The
law hasn’t been written yet — yet — that holds carriers of
user-generated internet content responsible for the user-generated
content they carry, just like movie studios, television networks and
book, magazine and newspaper publishers. Ask Peter Thiel, who funded
a series of lawsuits against Gawker, including an invasion of privacy
suit that bankrupted the site and forced it to close down. (You
should have Mr. Thiel’s number in your phone because he was an
early investor in Facebook.)
Most
people don’t have the resources to employ a battalion of fact
checkers. Nonetheless, while you were testifying before a
congressional committee two weeks ago, Representative Alexandria
Ocasio-Cortez asked you the following: “Do you see a potential
problem here with a complete lack of fact-checking on political
advertisements?” Then, when she pushed you further, asking you if
Facebook would or would not take down lies, you answered,
“Congresswoman, in most cases, in a democracy, I believe people
should be able to see for themselves what politicians they may or may
not vote for are saying and judge their character for themselves.”
Now
you tell me. If I’d known you felt that way, I’d have had the
Winklevoss twins invent Facebook. [my yellow highlighting]
Labels:
Facebook,
lies and lying,
political advertising
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment