5 ms·

I would agree with you if Facebook were only passively present in other countries by virtue of the internet being inherently global. But Facebook is a massive c

I would agree with you if Facebook were only passively present in other countries by virtue of the internet being inherently global. But Facebook is a massive company with a physical presence, an enormous financial presence, and is a political presence in Canada, UK, Australia, and probably all of the G7 countries. Rupert Murdoch was obliged to front up to the UK Parliament. Zuckerberg is no less obliged here.

paxys 7y ago
Sure, but you can say the same for most other countries outside the G7 as well. After Canada it would be India summoning him, then Brazil, then Israel, Turkey, Japan, Mexico and countless others. Where do you draw the line? Should flying around the world answering to politicians be his full-time job, or should he be able to actually run his company and let local executives handle such problems?
- TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago
  All of those governments have the sovereignty to order him to appear. And they probably mostly lack the jurisdiction to coerced him to appear, while having the jurisdiction to impose whatever penalties they see fit for his non-appearance. Personally, I think it would be amusing if all the major countries had outstanding warrants for Mark Zuckerberg’s arrest, and imposed strict privacy regulations upon Facebook et al.
- mpweiher 7y ago
  He is free to stop operating in those countries.
- CosmicShadow 7y ago
  I guess if he had local "executives", it'd be their jobs, but at least in Canada it doesn't sound like there is one. I'd have more sympathy if it was a small company where the loss of time from a CEO being involved meant something and could harm the company, however when you are that big, the job of CEO becomes being a spokesperson, sales person, and face of the company, and when you get really big, it becomes dealing with this kind of shit. Even in a 10 person company the CEO can be never in the office, constantly selling this or that or doing PR and things still run. Even if they never did anything else, I don't think Facebook would die anytime soon. When you get yourself into a mess like this, you can expect it to become more busy that you'd like, but that's called reaping what you sow. If you didn't want to deal with it, get local executives that can go to jail on your behalf.
- rudiv 7y ago
  God forbid he answer questions from the Indian parliament, he might have to explain why WhatsApp has been so slow to invest in stopping the spread of fake news in a country where it has literally led to lynchings.
- dblohm7 7y ago
  Did you not read the article? This committee session was attended by parliamentarians from over 10 countries. According to [1], this grand committee includes politicians from the United Kingdom, Argentina, Belgium, Brazil, France, Ireland, Latvia, Singapore. Ecuador, Mexico, Morocco and Trinidad and Tobago. If they aren't willing to speak to this grand committee, when would they speak to anyone outside the US? It sounds like they won't. [1] https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/facebook-contempt-parliament-1.5145347 https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/facebook-contempt-parliamen...

paxys 7y ago

Sure, but you can say the same for most other countries outside the G7 as well. After Canada it would be India summoning him, then Brazil, then Israel, Turkey, Japan, Mexico and countless others. Where do you draw the line? Should flying around the world answering to politicians be his full-time job, or should he be able to actually run his company and let local executives handle such problems?

TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago
All of those governments have the sovereignty to order him to appear. And they probably mostly lack the jurisdiction to coerced him to appear, while having the jurisdiction to impose whatever penalties they see fit for his non-appearance. Personally, I think it would be amusing if all the major countries had outstanding warrants for Mark Zuckerberg’s arrest, and imposed strict privacy regulations upon Facebook et al.
mpweiher 7y ago
He is free to stop operating in those countries.
CosmicShadow 7y ago
I guess if he had local "executives", it'd be their jobs, but at least in Canada it doesn't sound like there is one. I'd have more sympathy if it was a small company where the loss of time from a CEO being involved meant something and could harm the company, however when you are that big, the job of CEO becomes being a spokesperson, sales person, and face of the company, and when you get really big, it becomes dealing with this kind of shit. Even in a 10 person company the CEO can be never in the office, constantly selling this or that or doing PR and things still run. Even if they never did anything else, I don't think Facebook would die anytime soon. When you get yourself into a mess like this, you can expect it to become more busy that you'd like, but that's called reaping what you sow. If you didn't want to deal with it, get local executives that can go to jail on your behalf.
rudiv 7y ago
God forbid he answer questions from the Indian parliament, he might have to explain why WhatsApp has been so slow to invest in stopping the spread of fake news in a country where it has literally led to lynchings.
dblohm7 7y ago
Did you not read the article? This committee session was attended by parliamentarians from over 10 countries. According to [1], this grand committee includes politicians from the United Kingdom, Argentina, Belgium, Brazil, France, Ireland, Latvia, Singapore. Ecuador, Mexico, Morocco and Trinidad and Tobago. If they aren't willing to speak to this grand committee, when would they speak to anyone outside the US? It sounds like they won't. [1] https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/facebook-contempt-parliament-1.5145347 https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/facebook-contempt-parliamen...