Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 17 Share on Twitter Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
OpEdNews Op Eds    H3'ed 11/2/19

Mark Zuckerberg is a Rich Jerk

By       (Page 1 of 2 pages)     (# of views)   2 comments
Author 2529
Message Dean Baker
Become a Fan
  (40 fans)

From CEPR

Mark Zuckerberg
Mark Zuckerberg
(Image by YouTube, Channel: TradingCoachUK)
  Details   DMCA

Last week, New York Times columnist Timothy Egan had a piece headlined "Why Doesn't Mark Zuckerberg Get It?" The piece then goes on to document how Facebook has become a medium for spreading lies and nonsense all over the world, that many ill-informed users have come to believe.

This is what Egan wants Zuckerberg to "get." While it would be nice if Zuckerberg understood the problems created by Facebook, and took effective measures to address them, the problem with Egan's piece is that there is no reason to expect that Zuckerberg would get this point.

Zuckerberg is not a political philosopher concerned about the public good. There is a zero evidence he is a deep thinker of any sort. He is a Harvard boy who stumbled into a good idea and had the necessary connections to get very rich from it: end of story.

It is bizarre that so many people look to the country's billionaires to tell us how the world should be constructed or think that these people have any great insight into such matters. Being a billionaire means that you were successful at getting very rich. There is no reason to believe that billionaires have any more insight into major policy issues than anyone else.

Imagine if we turned to LeBron James, a truly great basketball player, to get advice on how best to deal with global warming. LeBron is a smart guy, but no one would expect him to have special insights into dealing with global warming, in spite of his incredible skills on the basketball court.

In the same vein, why would anyone think that Zuckerberg would know or care about how Facebook should be run in a way that protects democracy? Zuckerberg runs Facebook to make to make money (lots of it), not to promote democracy. The way to fix the problems of Facebook is not to convince Zuckerberg of its harms, the way to fix Facebook is to change the law.

Ending Facebook's Exemption from Libel Law

The best way to address the immediate issue of concern with Facebook, that it will run political ads with lies, is simply to remove Facebook's exemption from libel law. In the early days of the Internet, Congress passed the Communications Decency Act, which established rules for Internet. The law included a provision, Section 230, which exempted intermediaries like Facebook from libel. This provision means that Facebook, unlike the New York Times or CNN, cannot be sued if it transmits false and damaging claims about individuals, companies, or other entities.

It is difficult to see why Facebook, or any Internet intermediary, should enjoy this sort of special treatment. Zuckerberg has said that he doesn't want to be in the business of determining what is true. It may be the case that his Facebook team is not terribly competent, but the fact is that his competitors in traditional media have been in this business for decades.

I cannot buy an ad in the New York Times or on CNN attacking Donald Trump, Joe Biden, or any other political figure unless I can demonstrate to them that the claims in the ad are true. This is partly because these companies are worried about their reputations, and don't want to be associated with passing along lies, but also because they could be subject to a libel suit if they helped me pass along libelous claims.

Zuckerberg might argue that Facebook's operations are highly automated, people can buy ads on Facebook without any human intervention. This means that it doesn't have staff available to review all the ads that it runs. That is undoubtedly true, but that is Mark Zuckerberg's problem. Just as the New York Times and CNN pay people to review the ads they run, Facebook can pay to review the ads it runs. That will cost lots of money and reduce Facebook's profits, but so what?

It is worth noting the contrast in the treatment of copyrights and libelous material by Facebook. In accordance with the law, Facebook polices its site for copyright violations. If someone has posted material that has been identified to Facebook as infringing on a copyright, Facebook will remove it from any sites where it has been posted. By contrast, Mark Zuckerberg says Facebook doesn't care if posted material can be shown to be false and libelous.

It is hard to see an argument as to why we should not be at least as concerned about protecting democracy as protecting copyright holders' ability to make money from their copyrights. It may be too much to demand that Facebook preemptively review posts for libelous material, but as with copyright infringement, they can be required to remove material that has been demonstrated to be false and damaging.

The law can also require that Facebook take steps to correct the damage from any false and libelous posts. This could mean that it would post a correction to the material that would appear on any Facebook pages where the libelous material appeared.

Next Page  1  |  2

 

Rate It | View Ratings

Dean Baker Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Dr. Dean Baker is a macroeconomist and Co-Director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, D.C. He previously worked as a senior economist at the Economic Policy Institute and an assistant professor at Bucknell University. (more...)
 
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

STAY IN THE KNOW
If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEdNews Newsletter
Name
Email
   (Opens new browser window)
 

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

The Federal Reserve Board and the Presidential Candidates

The Deficit Hawks Target Nurses and Firefighters

The Attack of the Real Black Helicopter Gang: The IMF Is Coming for Your Social Security

The profit on the TARP and Bernie Madoff

Poverty: The New Growth Industry in America

The Real Reason For The Government Shutdown

Comments Image Post Article Comment and Rate This Article

These discussions are not moderated. We rely on users to police themselves, and flag inappropriate comments and behavior. In accordance with our Guidelines and Policies, we reserve the right to remove any post at any time for any reason, and will restrict access of registered users who repeatedly violate our terms.

  • OpEdNews welcomes lively, CIVIL discourse. Personal attacks and/or hate speech are not tolerated and may result in banning.
  • Comments should relate to the content above. Irrelevant, off-topic comments are a distraction, and will be removed.
  • By submitting this comment, you agree to all OpEdNews rules, guidelines and policies.
          

Comment Here:   


You can enter 2000 characters. To remove limit, please click here.

Please login or register. Afterwards, your comment will be published.
 

Username
Password

Forgot your password? Click here and we will send an email to the address you used when you registered.
First Name
Last Name

I am at least 16 years of age
(make sure username & password are filled in. Note that username must be an email address.)

2 people are discussing this page, with 2 comments  Post Comment


molly cruz

Become a Fan
Author 7804
(Member since Sep 16, 2007), 15 fans, 17 articles, 622 quicklinks, 2824 comments, 14 diaries
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

  New Content

"Zuckerberg runs Facebook to make money." So?

As long as our campaigns are measured in their success by dollars raised it's fairly moot how much money Mark has.

As long as I've been watching, the Republicans have been shooting themselves in their feet, largely by their habit of underestimating the American People. Their ads so far have been pathetic, and I trust most are immune to most of their palaver by now, and if not, nothing is going to convert them to progressives no matter what. I wish the Democrats would get hold of some wizard ad people, as I find the ads the most entertaining part of TV these days. If all the progressives actually voted, we'd never see another Republican in Washington again. All Trump has done, with every act, is prove why he wasn't actually elected.

Submitted on Saturday, Nov 2, 2019 at 11:37:57 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (0+)
Help

shad williams

Become a Fan
Author 63282
(Member since Apr 13, 2011), 24 fans, 65 articles, 11 quicklinks, 3176 comments, 2 diaries
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

  New Content

Who will deny that the playing field is uneven? Playing fields related to creativity, taxation, news, or other have critters hiding in the fabric ready to deny service to new entrants.

The CIA's Mocking Bird operation infiltrated news organizations in order to propagandize the public and deny entrants with a different narrative than that of the ruling elites...has moved its behavior to the internet. The NYT and others of its ilk that deliberately participated in the propagandizing of generations of americans, and still do, can stfu...a bunch of warmongers, they are. When can we sue them? The internet is not owned by the oligarchs...yet, so objections to the Oligarchs' Narrative is still able to leak out.

In terms of copyright, patent and intellectual property - if the security state, sees a technological break through that threatens their world, that they don't control - uphold the rule of law? Nyet, they simply take it for themselves...sort of like the oil in Syria.

There has to be another foundation other than the motivation to make money that can sustain sentient advancement.

Is this the point of existence??

Submitted on Sunday, Nov 3, 2019 at 7:40:34 AM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (0+)
Help

 
Want to post your own comment on this Article? Post Comment