3 ms·
I mean, this is just factually not the case. There's a reason the government tells Meta what to allow and what not to allow on the platform. It's because an en
by aprilthird2021 3y ago
I mean, this is just factually not the case.
There's a reason the government tells Meta what to allow and what not to allow on the platform. It's because an enormous percentage of Americans get their news on a Meta-owned platform
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 3y agoWhat is "factually not the case"? That Facebook is a website? That anyone can run a website? Why is it that HN commenters are opposed to the factual statement: "Facebook is a website." It's like there is some hidden message in that short sentence that only HN commenters can see. We can look at a list of the Top 100 websites, or Top 1 Million, and Facebook will be listed. It is a website. If we took away the Facebook website, and required Facebook to "do business" without it, then what would happen. Facebook is a website. Meta does not produce news or other content. It is an intermediary, a middleman. More factual statements that may trigger HN commenters.
- aprilthird2021 3y agoIt's not "just" a website, it's the major app and social media ecosystem in the US. Frankly I think more people use the app than the website. It is a website. But the original comment was that Facebook is "just" a website. That's factually incorrect. It is much much more than "just" a website.