The implicit assertion is that this behavior wouldn't happen if not for Zuckerberg personally causing the behavior. As someone who has worked at large tech com

The implicit assertion is that this behavior wouldn't happen if not for Zuckerberg personally causing the behavior. As someone who has worked at large tech companies though, I find that to be an extremely questionable assertion. FB has incentives. Zuckerberg didn't invent the dynamics surrounding their business, and I don't see how having a faceless bureaucracy in charge would lead to an organization that is more willing to reject its own incentives. If anything it would seem like having more obscure and diffuse leadership would lead to less accountability, not more.