2 ms·

If Instagram were, say a government space, this would be called corruption; but, it is a private company operating a defacto public space, so it is seen as...em

If Instagram were, say a government space, this would be called corruption; but, it is a private company operating a defacto public space, so it is seen as...employees disobeying their employer? Or what? This is precisely the issue with company operated spaces: when there is shady crap going down, there's no accountability.

quuquuquu 9y ago
Hmm, interesting. I think this one is more "buyer beware". Government corruption is a when a missile manufacturer donates heavily to a pro-war candidate, and then that candidate ends up in the cabinet. 6 months later, bombing campaigns are in full force. A private company, or a private employee, selling eyeballs, legitimacy, and influence... it's extremely flawed, but I'm not sure it has a horrifically large effect on the world.
- noobermin 9y ago
  I concur the effect on the world is rather small here, the closest analogy I can think of are non-competitive bidding for a local park's construction that goes to the governor's friend. Another was Chris Christie lounging on a beach that was closed to the public. The latter is politically distasteful, but really didn't hurt anyone. It still was corruption of a sort.
  - quuquuquu 9y ago
    This all does sound like heft nepotism and corruption! On a per transaction basis, damage existe but is tolerable. At scale, it is nightmarish. I'm not sure the same can be said about buying Verifications, but too much of anything could be bad!!
  - Dylan16807 9y ago
    Not to justify his overall behavior, or the idea of 'closing' a beach when nothing is wrong with it, but being in his backyard is not really an abuse of power.
cm2187 9y ago
I'm pretty sure it is still corruption. It's like stealing from the company.
objclxt 9y ago
> it is a private company operating a defacto public space, so it is seen as...employees disobeying their employer? It is commercial bribery, and in many states - California included - there are laws specifically prohibiting it.
sfifs 9y ago
This would come under bribery and I'm pretty sure it can be prosecuted if Instagram wants to. They may not want to prosecute due to the negative attention it would attract.
adventured 9y ago
There's a massive, critical distinction in most cases. Government money is public tax payer money that is forcibly taken from the people's income to provide government services. Facebook's money is private shareholder money, most of which is derived from voluntary business transactions from advertisers. There's an entirely different responsibility between the two instances. If you're going to forcibly take money from people's incomes to deliver government services, your responsibility to do right by those tax payers is drastically greater in my opinion.

quuquuquu 9y ago

Hmm, interesting. I think this one is more "buyer beware". Government corruption is a when a missile manufacturer donates heavily to a pro-war candidate, and then that candidate ends up in the cabinet. 6 months later, bombing campaigns are in full force. A private company, or a private employee, selling eyeballs, legitimacy, and influence... it's extremely flawed, but I'm not sure it has a horrifically large effect on the world.

noobermin 9y ago
I concur the effect on the world is rather small here, the closest analogy I can think of are non-competitive bidding for a local park's construction that goes to the governor's friend. Another was Chris Christie lounging on a beach that was closed to the public. The latter is politically distasteful, but really didn't hurt anyone. It still was corruption of a sort.
- quuquuquu 9y ago
  This all does sound like heft nepotism and corruption! On a per transaction basis, damage existe but is tolerable. At scale, it is nightmarish. I'm not sure the same can be said about buying Verifications, but too much of anything could be bad!!
- Dylan16807 9y ago
  Not to justify his overall behavior, or the idea of 'closing' a beach when nothing is wrong with it, but being in his backyard is not really an abuse of power.

cm2187 9y ago

I'm pretty sure it is still corruption. It's like stealing from the company.

objclxt 9y ago

> it is a private company operating a defacto public space, so it is seen as...employees disobeying their employer? It is commercial bribery, and in many states - California included - there are laws specifically prohibiting it.

sfifs 9y ago

This would come under bribery and I'm pretty sure it can be prosecuted if Instagram wants to. They may not want to prosecute due to the negative attention it would attract.

adventured 9y ago

There's a massive, critical distinction in most cases. Government money is public tax payer money that is forcibly taken from the people's income to provide government services. Facebook's money is private shareholder money, most of which is derived from voluntary business transactions from advertisers. There's an entirely different responsibility between the two instances. If you're going to forcibly take money from people's incomes to deliver government services, your responsibility to do right by those tax payers is drastically greater in my opinion.