4 ms·
"A similar tactic was employed in 2018, after George Soros criticized Facebook as a “menace” against which society needed to be defended in a public speech in D
by rewindtheclock 6y ago
"A similar tactic was employed in 2018, after George Soros criticized Facebook as a “menace” against which society needed to be defended in a public speech in Davos. The company hired a firm to produce incendiary pro-Facebook research that contained anti-Semitic tropes about Soros, a Jewish Holocaust survivor, as the shadowy funder of anti-Facebook groups. The documents were then passed around to journalists with the urging that they look into Soros’s financial interests. In the ensuing controversy, Elliot Schrage, Facebook’s head of comms and policy and already on the way out, was blamed, while Sheryl Sandberg and Mark Zuckerberg stated they had no knowledge of the affair."
How does Facebook get away with this kind of stuff?
- Uhhrrr 6y agoZuckerberg and Sandberg are Jewish, and Soros really is a billionaire who funds all sorts of NGO's and has financial interests in all kinds of things, so I think it would be pretty hard to make something stick.
- inopinatus 6y agoSomeone’s membership of <identifiable tribe or social grouping> does not confer a specific additional moral obligation to defend a fellow member of their tribe/group more than they might deserve otherwise. Indeed this myth is actively invoked by bigots & bullies in conjunction with a counterexample as a twisted justification for ongoing persecution.
- Uhhrrr 6y agoI was not saying it does - I'm saying it's harder to go after someone for anti-Semitism when they're Semitic. Although now that I've seen the document in question, I must say there's really nothing there anyway.