Oh dear. Zuckerberg still doesn’t get it
Cambridge Analytica as an entity before the Guardian scoop, but had no idea how it was using his social network to influence elections.
Fair enough, you might think. No chief executive can be aware of everything that goes on at his or her company. Especially not one as big as Facebook. We should judge whether Zuckerberg is a responsible businessman on what he’s put in place to prevent such things happening again.
And this is where things go from being shoddy, to outright confusing. As we all know, the 2016 US election was heavily influenced by Cambridge Analytica gaming the system. And one of the main weapons in its arsenal was fake news.
When Ocasio-Cortez changed her line of questioning to explore what Facebook has changed to ensure future elections wouldn’t be plagued by this, Zuckerberg had his chance to show America’s lawmakers why he should be trusted.
He should have taken the opportunity to clearly explain how Facebook has changed in the past three years. How Facebook is no longer a social media platform that politicians can use to spread fake news to as many voters as they like, as long as they have the money to do so.
Instead, Zuckerberg showed the world that he still doesn’t get it. He confirmed that Facebook wouldn’t be taking down posts from political candidates, even if they do contain obvious lies. But the social network had employed a third party to check the truth of posts that go viral on Facebook.
Instead of owning the problem and owning the fix, like a good chief executive should, Zuckerberg outlined how his company has once again passed on the responsibility to someone else.
Zuckerberg thought he was on the offensive when he told Ocasio-Cortez about his company’s reforms.
What happened next was box-office stuff. Ocasio-Cortez: ‘‘Can you explain why you named The Daily Caller, a publication with well-documented ties to white supremacists, as an official fact-checker for Facebook?’’
Zuckerberg: ‘‘Congresswoman, sure. We actually don’t appoint the independent factcheckers. They go through an independent organisation called the Independent FactChecking Network that has a rigorous standard for who they allow to serve as a fact-checker.’’
Ocasio-Cortez: ‘‘So you would say white supremacist-tied publications meet a rigorous standard for fact-checking?’’
Zuckerberg: ‘‘Congresswoman, I would say that we’re not the one assessing that standard. The International Fact-Checking Network is the one setting that standard.’’
Oh dear.
Is this the sort of leadership we want from someone looking to launch a digital currency that could one-day replace traditional government-backed currencies?
A chief executive who goes missing when his company is in the headlines for all the wrong reasons. A chief executive who allows his company to take years, not days, to fix problems that have major global implications. And then refuses to take responsibility when things go wrong? Again.