3 ms·
"I am fervently against the idea that Facebook has any kind of obligation to include a feature because not doing so would offend a minority of its users." Face
by lukesandberg 15y ago
"I am fervently against the idea that Facebook has any kind of obligation to include a feature because not doing so would offend a minority of its users."
Facebook is a company, its users help them make money, doing things to please their users is obviously what they are in the business of doing. I wouldn't say they have an obligation, but it is definitely in their best interest.
As for his larger points on free speech and the hypocrisy of American culture. I don't think is hypocritical for a country to defend free speech and also be somewhat culturally prudish when it comes to television broadcasts or sexual content in video games. Taste and Rights are fundamentally different.
- kaeluka 15y agoWhat if, say, facebook thinks that more users will be pissed off by offering the transexual option? Or if someone who gives orders is too religious. Or that they don't deem it important. My point is: they are to decide what is in their best interest - given their resources, given their beliefs.
- lukesandberg 15y agoIf the point of the article was to say that facebook should be able to decide what to do based on what they believe is in their best interest...then thats not particularly interesting and i have no doubt that facebook is doing exactly that (along with every other company and individual in the world).