6 ms·

You know, I really doubt that Mark wakes up in the morning, meets with his editing team, and says "guys, we need to push the globalist left agenda". The company

by jbob2000 10y ago

You know, I really doubt that Mark wakes up in the morning, meets with his editing team, and says "guys, we need to push the globalist left agenda". The company is massive, so to say that he has some kind of finger on a "left agenda" button is way over simplifying things.

sbuttgereit 10y ago
And yet, in essence, the OP could be right, too. Most of us simply cannot know how Mark or various of his minions (at whatever level) choose to use the various soap boxes they have at their disposal. Rather than oversimplifying, I think the OP is more likely correct and I fully expect Mark and team to wake up in the morning wondering how they can use their privileged access to many millions of users to advance whatever agenda they are supporting that day (political or economic); within some limits of "seemliness", of course. I expect them to act on those thoughts, too. Perhaps it is an oversimplification to bundle ideologies into a monolithic "left" and "right"; reality there is more complex than that. However, for the purposes of generalization it's not unreasonable to group people together when many of their ideologies bear resemblance to the archetypes of political division. To be overly literal about that is, itself, being overly simplistic.
rm_-rf_slash 10y ago
It's more like this: people in tech for the most part have similar political views, so similar that they almost seem common sense. Take LGBTQ rights. Safe to say Silicon Valley is more pro than con on this issue (and benefits from having a larger and more diverse talent pool), so it is easy to see that perspective being the "correct" side of the argument and seeing the other side as mean-spirited, bigoted, on the wrong side of history...you get the idea.
eplanit 10y ago
There is evidence that he actually does decidedly (and within his rights) promote the "left agenda". He's been pushing Black Lives Matter within the company, and anyone who expresses disagreement irks him[1]. [1] http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2016/02/26/467985384/zuckerberg-tells-facebook-staff-to-stop-crossing-out-black-lives-matter http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2016/02/26/467...
- EdHominem 10y ago
  Not true at all. He's been calling out people who vandalize messages they don't like - in particular, BLM.
- larubbio 10y ago
  I think if you read that article, he isn't pushing 'Black Lives Matter', but rather asked employees to stop crossing it out and writing 'All Lives Matter' His quote from that article explains it "'Black lives matter' doesn't mean other lives don't. It's simply asking that the black community also achieves the justice they deserve. We've never had rules around what people can write on our walls — we expect everybody to treat each other with respect. Regardless of the content or location, crossing out something means silencing speech, or that one person's speech is more important than another's." There may be other cases of him pushing the "left agenda" but I don't think the article you link shows it.
  - ars 10y ago
    > 'Black lives matter' doesn't mean other lives don't. Ha! Yes, actually it does mean that. Otherwise you would not single out a single group as more deserving of life than others. When you call out a specific thing in your argument, you do that to specifically exclude other similar items.
    - solipsism 10y ago
      > Otherwise you would not single out a single group as more deserving of life than others. It doesn't say "Black lives matter more than others." Everyone who understands why it's "Black Lives Matter!" instead of "All Lives Matter!" also understands why you think it should be "All Lives Matter!", we just disagree. There's no subtlety to your point, it's blunt and easy to understand. The difference is, people who think it should be "All Lives Matter!" don't understand why we think it should be "Black Lives Matter!". There's a nuanced point that you don't seem to understand. When you suggest that we're saying black lives matter more than any other lives, you make it clear that you don't get it. This is fine, if you stop misrepresenting the intentions of others they might be willing to explain it to you. Edit: And by the way, you don't have to agree with it the nuanced point in order to understand it. So Zuck insisting people not cross out "Black Lives Matter" is not him pushing that as an agenda -- it's just him showing an understanding that "Black Lives Matter!" is not the same as "White Power!"
rdancer 10y ago
Facebook is, as an institution, proud to have ignited national revolutions and shaped policy debates. I doubt Mr Zuckerberg doesn't do that.

sbuttgereit 10y ago

And yet, in essence, the OP could be right, too. Most of us simply cannot know how Mark or various of his minions (at whatever level) choose to use the various soap boxes they have at their disposal. Rather than oversimplifying, I think the OP is more likely correct and I fully expect Mark and team to wake up in the morning wondering how they can use their privileged access to many millions of users to advance whatever agenda they are supporting that day (political or economic); within some limits of "seemliness", of course. I expect them to act on those thoughts, too. Perhaps it is an oversimplification to bundle ideologies into a monolithic "left" and "right"; reality there is more complex than that. However, for the purposes of generalization it's not unreasonable to group people together when many of their ideologies bear resemblance to the archetypes of political division. To be overly literal about that is, itself, being overly simplistic.

rm_-rf_slash 10y ago

It's more like this: people in tech for the most part have similar political views, so similar that they almost seem common sense. Take LGBTQ rights. Safe to say Silicon Valley is more pro than con on this issue (and benefits from having a larger and more diverse talent pool), so it is easy to see that perspective being the "correct" side of the argument and seeing the other side as mean-spirited, bigoted, on the wrong side of history...you get the idea.

eplanit 10y ago

There is evidence that he actually does decidedly (and within his rights) promote the "left agenda". He's been pushing Black Lives Matter within the company, and anyone who expresses disagreement irks him[1]. [1] http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2016/02/26/467985384/zuckerberg-tells-facebook-staff-to-stop-crossing-out-black-lives-matter http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2016/02/26/467...

EdHominem 10y ago
Not true at all. He's been calling out people who vandalize messages they don't like - in particular, BLM.
larubbio 10y ago
I think if you read that article, he isn't pushing 'Black Lives Matter', but rather asked employees to stop crossing it out and writing 'All Lives Matter' His quote from that article explains it "'Black lives matter' doesn't mean other lives don't. It's simply asking that the black community also achieves the justice they deserve. We've never had rules around what people can write on our walls — we expect everybody to treat each other with respect. Regardless of the content or location, crossing out something means silencing speech, or that one person's speech is more important than another's." There may be other cases of him pushing the "left agenda" but I don't think the article you link shows it.
- ars 10y ago
  > 'Black lives matter' doesn't mean other lives don't. Ha! Yes, actually it does mean that. Otherwise you would not single out a single group as more deserving of life than others. When you call out a specific thing in your argument, you do that to specifically exclude other similar items.
  - solipsism 10y ago
    > Otherwise you would not single out a single group as more deserving of life than others. It doesn't say "Black lives matter more than others." Everyone who understands why it's "Black Lives Matter!" instead of "All Lives Matter!" also understands why you think it should be "All Lives Matter!", we just disagree. There's no subtlety to your point, it's blunt and easy to understand. The difference is, people who think it should be "All Lives Matter!" don't understand why we think it should be "Black Lives Matter!". There's a nuanced point that you don't seem to understand. When you suggest that we're saying black lives matter more than any other lives, you make it clear that you don't get it. This is fine, if you stop misrepresenting the intentions of others they might be willing to explain it to you. Edit: And by the way, you don't have to agree with it the nuanced point in order to understand it. So Zuck insisting people not cross out "Black Lives Matter" is not him pushing that as an agenda -- it's just him showing an understanding that "Black Lives Matter!" is not the same as "White Power!"

rdancer 10y ago

Facebook is, as an institution, proud to have ignited national revolutions and shaped policy debates. I doubt Mr Zuckerberg doesn't do that.