Am I the only one who wasn't "shocked & appalled" to hear Facebook put profits ahead of safety?

[dflprincess]

Granted they've taken it to new & different levels but when you think of the tobacco, fossil fuel, and chemical companies (to name a few & watch "Black Water" if you haven't already), putting "profits ahead of safety" is pretty much SOP for large companies.

And it's a bit disingenuous for Members of Congress (many of whom are willing to sell out the best interests of the country for a few bucks) to pretend they can't believe anyone would do such a thing.

I'm not saying it's OK Zuckerburg operates like this & shouldn't be scrutinized, just that I wasn't surprised to hear it.

[Lunabell]

1. I thought the same exact thing.

Not surprised at all.

[mia]

2. Another day, another dollar,

until victims file lawsuits. Members of Congress will profit as long as they can. Wish it weren't so.

[eppur_se_muova]

3. Hardly. I've never seen the appeal of Facebook.

Started out just hating the dehumanizing name; then they provided lots of other, more solid reasons.

[canetoad]

4. FB knew it's techniques

Fucked with brains. Fucked with critical thinking skills. Rewarded the most base of all base reactions. FFS, they knew in the 50s abd 60s that certain tv ads promted a response. Why are we just skirting this now?

[AngryOldDem]

5. No. Profit is the overriding motivation.

This is a new Gilded Age. These robber barons and their corporations are all in it for their own gain. They couldn’t care less about workers, customers, end users, and the public. It’s all about the $$$$$$$ (and avoiding taxes on said $$$$$$$).

[luv2fly]

6. Not at all surprised

Sadly though, I am a bit surprised by the number of people here who want to continue to defend their use of the platform as though there are no other options available. I don't know if the numbers are going down, or if Facebook defenders are just becoming a bit more quiet, but that there are any left at all somewhat befuddles me.

[betsuni]

7. Old but good: