My problem with current political commentary on Meta’s policy changes is the implication that Mark Zuckerberg is making such decisions because he just wants to conform to the current political climate. That implication of conformity sometimes reads as if people believe corporations and their executives have no political agendas of their own, so they adhere to the status quo—and I find that analysis to be naïve at best.
Conversation
Notices
-
Embed this notice
Anna e só (anna@friend.camp)'s status on Sunday, 12-Jan-2025 23:37:55 JST Anna e só -
Embed this notice
Hisham (hisham_hm@mastodon.social)'s status on Tuesday, 14-Jan-2025 04:45:31 JST Hisham @anna The reading that this is a need to conform does not preclude the perception of their political agenda. He needs to conform _because_ of his agenda, which is in equal parts political and economical.
IMO Zuckerberg seems more worried about maintaining his market/economic position than pushing a specific ideological course. Musk is doing the latter (as a means to amass further power) and he now has the upper hand. The timing and tone of Zuckerberg were a white flag to the incoming regime.
-
Embed this notice
Anna e só (anna@friend.camp)'s status on Tuesday, 14-Jan-2025 04:45:31 JST Anna e só @hisham_hm That’s the thing for me, Meta platforms have always been like that.
And that’s just one example in one country.
I don’t see latest events as change, I see it as Meta and Zuckerberg being much more explicit about what they’ve always supported. I think it’s acceptable to say they’ve found support in being more open about it, but “conformity” seems to imply they’re being forced, in one way or another, to comply. They agree with this.
-
Embed this notice