Did you actually read the article or are you just trying to create controversy? That quote comes from a Facebook spokesperson trying to push back against the ne

Did you actually read the article or are you just trying to create controversy? That quote comes from a Facebook spokesperson trying to push back against the negative attention. > Facebook issued a lengthy statement from director of policy communications Lena Pietsch titled "Missing Facts from Tonight's 60 Minutes Segment." > She pointed to Facebook's investment to monitor for harmful content; disputed the way Facebook's own research on teenagers' mental health has been reported; and rejected the claim that the social network has furthered political polarization. How can you say "If there was a story here, I feel like they’re working hard on overplaying their hand at the risk of losing the audience once the initial frenzy wears off." when you have clearly demonstrated that you didn't bother to read the story in the first place and just like to cherrypick quotes out of context to prove a point? EDIT: And now the OP has edited their post but still stands by their claim that this is a nothingburger, without evidence this time. For context, the OP originally quoted "She pointed to Facebook's investment to monitor for harmful content" out of context as evidence of something good that facebook did but this article is trying to trump up into something bad.