Surprise Zuckerberg Admission to Senator Opens FB to TRILLIONS in Losses
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg spent hours testifying before Congress Tuesday and Wednesday, but it was one sentence of his testimony that may end up having the biggest impact on the company’s bottom line.
It came in response to a question from Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas.
“We’ve been told that platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and the like are neutral platforms, and the people who own and run them for profit … bore no responsibility for the content,” Cornyn said. “Do you agree now that Facebook and other social media platforms are not neutral platforms but bear some responsibility for the content?”
Zuckerberg’s somewhat surprising response was, “I agree that we’re responsible for the content.”
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg: "I agree that we're responsible for the content" on Facebook. https://t.co/V41gBaclMU pic.twitter.com/yOIEebivdk
— ABC News (@ABC) April 10, 2018
That could be a game-changer for Zuckerberg and his company.
I predict that FB will be regulated but will the regulations be driven by FB lobbyist? Yes I think that will be the case. It is apparent that FB is actively seeking to have regulations imposed. My friends among the regulations that will come I believe that tyranny on speech will be front and center.
Allowing leftist corporations to be the police is not a desirable outcome. It is a Corporatocracy in play.
I suspect that gov'ts will protect FB from total destruction to its bottom line.
interesting point Patricia
it does appear that Zuckerberg is calling for legislation, which is something large corporations have long done, openly and enthusiastically it seems over the past couple decades, which usually turns out to be to beneficial to them by hindering smaller competition.
I've paid little attention to Z's testimonies... but have noticed he's hyping AI as the solution for deciding what is hate speech. That'd be convenient in that no human could be held accountable for biases I suppose. It concerns me though, given most progressive indoctrination well qualifies as artificial intelligence and produces nothing beneficial to anything similar to freedom/liberty. ;' /
...all that stuff shouldn't even be a 'thing' really, this whole outlawing 'hate speech' has already gotten more clout than it ever should have. It inherently can't lead to good things.
It want turn out well e.g. AI used to flag hate speech.
Might be interested in this ...
I think it's standard procedure of billionaires somehow, to pass out $$ to all political low lives no matter what label they wear. ..similar to paying off the local mob for 'protection' I suppose
It is standard operating procedure for business' to pass out donations to campaigns no matter their party affiliations. Agree its an ugly practice. Yep it seems like "paying off the local mob for protection". Good analogy.
Thought that was a good move.
Certainly one just might agree that the progressive/socialist stacked hi-tech has brought their woes on to themselves. Now they are just looking for the feds to save their behinds.
A new piece of legislation in CA, http://www.themadpatriots.com/freedom-news/california-democrat-move...
Now I doubt it will go anywhere, I should hope.
Did not the "baker" get punished for excluding gay's wedding? Did not Zuckerberg help the unrest across the Middle East with his assisting the rebels through the use of FB. Did not Obama threaten Government control over FB? There is no doubt Zuckerberg is a Leftist. Like many other Leftist sites he is controlling the content of FB on political grounds. Even AOL is moving most of my political sites into the scam bin. At least the baker believed in God. People like Zuckerberg place their faith in man and a political cause.
The baker was told as a public entity he must serve all. Should not the same standard be held to FB. Blocking opposing political views is a statement loud and clear. If FB was a Political Activism Forum for FB's own Party then it could be understandable but, it is a commercial adventure, to make money. As such, FB should be held to the same standards as any commercial business. I find this probing of "why" ridiculous and a waste of time and tax-payer dollars.
Did not Conservatives just take on the IRS and win? Should not Conservatives now take on FB and win. If we leave it up to the Government it just becomes an other quagmire to end up in limbo like all other grievances collecting cobwebs in the closet. Perhaps FB should now be called GFBC much like GMC? Government Face Book Corporation and Government Motors Corporation. Obama had his eye on FB from the beginning of his reign. After threatening to take over FB it seems Zuckerberg struck a deal. There is no doubt the weasel Zuckerberg grew up fast under Obama's Administration and learned how the political game is played. Yet, he is still just a little kid in the adult political arena.
Great points, I agree. Just seems there is a different play for for the left and the right...I also agree Zuckerman is just a kid playing with the big boys...
I agree. Christine made good points.
Keep in mind that regulations imposed on FB