🟢 Enough with the Facebook drama already!
Not in a bad mood, I promise. But can we stop freaking out every time Zuckerberg claims I'm "just in it for the money"? Instead, let’s focus on radical innovation: how can big brand names regain direct control over their core audiences...
I've been unwillingly involved in too many discussions about the latest turnaround in March's Zuckerberg policy regarding Meta's moderation. Yes, they don't care anymore. Let me sum up my view on all this as two very technical points:
- Why is anyone surprised again? 🙄
- No, it's not political.
Or, more eloquently:
First, I'm genuinely surprised that anyone would think that Meta has developed any backbone or ounce of morality in its venture. To quote the admirable Kara Swisher's latest book: "As it turned out, it was capitalism after all."
Please explain this to me: Who in its right mind would suspect that Zuckerberg has any ambition other than simply maximizing its bottom line and stock valuation? If you still think that The Social Network is here to make the world a better place or anything else along these lines, at this point, you're seriously part of the problem if only because your naiveté feeds these algorithms.
Never trust me or anyone else on this. Just read the research on this:
CDCMMWR
From this, you have just to filter out all the convoluted reasoning that Zuckerberg is offering about freedom of speech, the Big American Dream™️ , and whatever giant bald eagle is riding to fly into his office every morning. At the end of the day, Trump's arrival simply opens the floodgates of 'from now on, anything goes.'
This announcement is about one thing and one thing only. Saving money on an army of moderators developing their own mental illness from dealing with how horrible humanity can be at scale when we're online and saving even more money on potential class actions from users of the platforms.
Here again, if you need some update about what shitshow Facebook is behind the scenes, let me point you at this amazing piece of journalism from 2019:
Casey Newton
So, no, it's not political.
Alien would have landed in the White House's front lane, or the lost city of Atlantis would have resurfaced near the shores of Corsica (don't ask, I have secret knowledge I can't share here); Zuckerberg would have pondered the opportunity of letting go of moderation in the same way.
To understand the extent of Zuckerberg's commitment to making money (not sustaining any other corporate values or political agenda), remember that these changes have not been made for Europe. And yes, this is obviously a for-now situation. As soon as enough European governments turn far right, Zuckerberg will get his free pass to cut further costs. But for now, he knows it would be too risky.
So what is the real big question about all this?
Well, I would say that, just like with Russia or with what was Twitter, big brands will have to decide if they embrace greed fully and try to show some restraint or not. Do you still advertise on Facebook and Instagram, but only in Europe? Make some declarations and risk antagonizing a large part of the US population who genuinely think this is a remarkable idea.
This is an innovation problem.
As in: The market is changing rapidly; what will you do about it?
To a large extent, this is painting a world where social media, born a quarter of a century ago, are now fully toxic incumbent businesses that big retail brands (and others) are still trying to figure out. They still don't know how to use them reliably (even if, admittedly, some of them developed some striking expertise). They don't know how to switch out of them. Even more importantly, they haven't yet found a way to rebuild a direct link with their massive customer base without depending on Meta's mediation.
When, in 2023, I was writing about why I was quitting Twitter (yes, at the time, it was a bit early and seemingly a radical thing to do–now, everyone remotely sane has done the same), I was saying:
Also, no, I won't be on Bluesky, Mastodon, or whatever. It's just more of the same. Recycling what kinda worked in 2008 and trying again with some tweaks is doomed from the outset. (Also, this is kinda worrying for Silicon Valley if their elite entrepreneurs can only shove the same shit around, don't you think?)
Said differently, you won't solve your issues with Facebook by jumping to another social media platform. It will be more of the same. If not now, within a few years or months.
To quote John Grubber on this:
In theory it sounds like a noble idea to let everyone in the world post whatever they want and have it be connected and amplified to like-minded individuals. In practice, it’s a disaster.
So yes, the real structural and strategic question is about regaining direct control of your brand's audience without Meta, Alphabet, or Tencent. It might not be realistic or possible, but that would be a major radical market breakthrough (i.e., radical innovation.)
