Mark Zuckerberg’s rebuttal of accusations in opposition to Fb and name for motion by Congress are simply an try and have the federal government defend his monopoly, digital freedoms activist Edward Snowden mentioned.
The CEO of Fb posted a prolonged response to this week’s outage of firm providers and the congressional testimony of Frances Haugen, a former Fb product supervisor who accused the corporate of assorted sins, together with placing revenue earlier than the protection of youngsters.
A lot of the essay was a rejection of the accusatory narrative framing, whereas arguing that Fb is definitely a pressure for good, within the well-being of its customers fairly than monetary advantages or market share. Zuckerberg additionally mentioned he needs his firm to be extra regulated, as a result of “at some degree the proper physique to evaluate tradeoffs between social equities is our democratically elected Congress.”
For instance, what’s the proper age for teenagers to have the ability to use web providers? How ought to web providers confirm individuals’s ages? And the way ought to firms stability teenagers’ privateness whereas giving dad and mom visibility into their exercise?
In different phrases, Fb needs lawmakers to think about the next: “A) legally limiting teen use of web providers; B) establish verification mandates and C) limiting teen privateness,” Edward Snowden tweeted, calling the proposal “on-brand” for Fb.
Snowden, who’s a powerful supporter of on-line freedom and opponent of strikes that might give extra energy to governments over digital areas, is extremely skeptical about Zuckerberg’s motives. Laws alongside the traces of these referred to as for by the Fb CEO could be “modestly burdening the prosperous Fb, however completely crushing its upstart opponents,” Snowden believes.
Since 2004, Fb has by no means cared in regards to the regulation or "social equities." Don't fall for it.
Zuckerberg suggests Congressional motion now solely as a result of he’s assured the consequence will serve him—modestly burdening the prosperous Fb, however completely crushing its upstart opponents. https://t.co/ZzmGPKoRuP
— Edward Snowden (@Snowden) October 6, 2021
Haugen’s testimony earlier than the Senate Subcommittee on Client Safety, Product Security, and Knowledge Safety centered on how Fb supposedly ignored hurt that its merchandise pose to youngsters and the American society typically. She was touted as a courageous ‘whistleblower’ by the mainstream media, however skeptics say her interviews and look earlier than Congress are only a public relations marketing campaign meant to whip up assist for extra restrictions on on-line speech.
Zuckerberg implied that Haugen was making a false narrative about Facebooks’ analysis packages, and that this line of criticism offers tech firms the improper incentives.
“If we assault organizations making an effort to check their impression on the world, we’re successfully sending the message that it’s safer not to have a look at all, in case you discover one thing that might be held in opposition to you,” he mentioned, warning that this path “results in a spot that might be far worse for society.”
Critics of Fb, like Snowden, say Zuckerberg is simply taking part in the sufferer.
Additionally on rt.com
Fb is simply too highly effective, morally bankrupt and in want of presidency oversight, ‘whistleblower’ Haugen tells Senate
In the event you like this story, share it with a buddy!