4 ms·
This question unfairly frames the situation at Meta. It presumes that the company’s reputation has irreparably declined, and implies Zuckerberg's hobbies detrac
by infamouscow 2y ago
This question unfairly frames the situation at Meta. It presumes that the company’s reputation has irreparably declined, and implies Zuckerberg's hobbies detract from the leadership of a company he owns in every sense of the word.
Meta, like any large organization, faces complex challenges and public scrutiny. It’s misleading to focus solely on the negative aspects without acknowledging the positive contributions and efforts to address these issues.
Leaders can and do have personal lives and interests outside their professional responsibilities. Suggesting that his hobbies indicate a lack of commitment to Meta is an ad hominem attack.
- Desafinado 2y agoIn fairness to Mark, the company is at a point where he himself likely has limited control over how it operates. But my view is that the reputation of the company has irreparably declined among thinking people. I'm not sure what the argument would be otherwise. And I find the 'complex challenges' comment a bit misleading in itself as the company literally sweeps the danger it causes under the rug. But really I'm interested in hearing from employees in the company, not debating the company's merits.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- okdood64 2y agoWhat is “thinking people”?