Facebook v Soros: 'Congress must probe'

[nitpicker]

Source: BBC

Facebook v Soros: 'Congress must probe'

8 hours ago

One of George Soros's lieutenants has called on US politicians to probe Facebook, after the social network confirmed that it had hired a PR firm to make claims about the financier. The head of Mr Soros's grant-making network claimed Facebook had smeared the philanthropist, adding "this needs independent, congressional oversight".

Sheryl Sandberg, Facebook's deputy chief, has also clarified her role. She said she had been told of the PR firm but had not remembered its name.

The latest developments follow the social network's decision to publish a memo by its departing communications chief, Elliot Schrage. In it, he confirmed Facebook had directed the PR firm Definers to investigate Soros's links to the Freedom from Facebook campaign, which is seeking the company's break-up. Mr Schrage added that related documents were then sent to journalists on Facebook's behalf.

The memo had originally been sent to Facebook's staff and had already been leaked to the news site Techcrunch . But its re-publication by Facebook represented the first confirmation that Definers had not been engaged in a rogue operation.
(snip)


Read more: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-46302140

[still_one]

1. This is from the company whose CEO said Holocaust deniers are making an honest mistake.

[cstanleytech]

2. Personally I have not seen the logic in breaking up Facebook or Google just because so many

people use them.
Granted if this was a case of them being the only company able to make a car and no one else had the ability it might make sense but both Facebook and Google do not really produce anything and people do have the option to use other services.
I mean take Myspace, it used to be the big game on campus until Facebook came along and eventually that will happen to Facebook as well as Google.

[xor]

3. I haven't heard a compelling argument that goes into detail about what the goal is

What is the intended goal, what would be the end result, and how do those results help reach the intended goal (assuming it's a goal worth achieving) are not things I've seen explained in detail.

I mean, I can some rational to breaking up google because they have their hands in everything. They have the search stuff, the ad stuff, the business suite stuff, the cloud stuff, the self-driving car stuff, and a ton of other things. There may be some competition type of case that can be made, but I don't know if there's a strong enough case for that. Are we also going to break up Amazon? IBM? But even if so, that's not really what people seem worried about. It seems like people want to break these companies up because too many people use them. So they are looking to break up specific parts of the company into many. I don't even know how that would work. Facebook1.com facebook2.com?? It's not like people are saying "hey, we need to make it so facebook the "software company" needs to break away from the part of facebook that does the hardware stuff and hosting. That is something that has a clear path to be implemented (not saying it should be or that it makes sense)

I would like to see some more concrete details on what people mean when they say split the companies up, and how they think doing that would help in fixing our mess.

[cstanleytech]

4. Plenty of other companies are involved in all those areas though.

Sure, Google is currently the strongest in most of those areas but no company remains #1 forever especially in something as fluid as the internet.

[SWBTATTReg]

11. They broke up ATT back in 1983 into all of its' multiple components of today...and in a ...

small way ushered in the computer age by making digital links more cheaper and widespread.

The excuse to not break up a company because of what it does and that too many people use them is no excuse. One can study the results of this breakup (ATT into the multiple phone companies of today) via all of the books etc. out on the marketplace today.

And they will find a way to break up FB, Amazon, IBM, if any of these companies are ever that far into the legal limbo in lets say, 20 years if ever (I doubt any of them will ever be sued etc.).

[UpInArms]

6. Just regulate the shit out of them ... make them put

An independent group watching their media ... get those ratfuck troll accounts booted ... stop allowing hate memes and propaganda

.... just for starters

[True Blue American]

7. Does anyone

Use Facebook? I do not even like Twitter, maybe posted 3 times over the years,yet my email is flooded every day.

[justgamma]

5. I'm almost positive that the pukes

would turn this into a witch hunt of Soros. Don't think they wouldn't do it.

[ck4829]

8. K&R

[paleotn]

9. lieutenants?

Excuse me? Strange verbiage for referring to an executive in Soros's company. I may be overly sensitive due to the ridiculous accusations of right wing nutters when it comes to just one of many private investment companies in the US. But you would think the author could have come up with wording that didn't invoke something out of The Godfather.

[newblewtoo]

10. Maybe someone needs to talk me down here

but when ever I read about Billionaires fighting I am reminded of bull elephants fighting in the wild (not something I really want to be in the middle of). Bezos, Zuckerberg, and Soros can have at it as far as I am concerned. Soros has been selling tech stock and the market has taken a hit as a result. It is going to be tough on the old IRA if you are still in the market. I no longer post links since I cannot keep up with what is acceptable but anyone can search if they want a glimpse of the battle going on.