Rises from the soul, and sways The heart of every single hearer, With deepest power, in simple ways. You’ll sit forever, gluing things together, Cooking up a stew from other’s scraps, Blowing on a miserable fire, Made from your heap of dying ash. Let apes and children praise your art, If their admiration’s to your taste, But you’ll never speak from heart to heart, Unless it rises up from your heart’s space.”
(Bloomberg) -- Facebook Inc. Chief Executive Officer Mark Zuckerberg
addressed a recent series of negative stories about the company for the first
time by saying accusations that it puts profit over user safety are “just not
true.”
“It’s difficult to see coverage that misrepresents our work and our motives.
At the most basic level, I think most of us just don’t recognize the false
picture of the company that is being painted,” he wrote in a note to employees
on Tuesday that he also posted publicly.
“There were conflicts of interest between what was good for the public and
what was good for Facebook,” she said. “Facebook over and over again chose to
optimize for its own interests like making more money.”
Zuckerberg wrote that he was bothered by a narrative that Facebook is not
worried about children’s safety. Two Senate hearings over the past week have
focused on Facebook’s impact on teens and young children, including Haugen’s
testimony.
The Wall Street Journal published internal Facebook research last month,
provided by Haugen, that showed Instagram made some mental health issues worse
for teenagers who use the product. The company, which was building a version of
Instagram for children, has put that project on hold.
“When it comes to young people’s health or well-being, every negative
experience matters,” the CEO wrote. “We have worked for years on
industry-leading efforts to help people in these moments and I’m proud of the
work we’ve done.”
Facebook doesn’t benefit from content that makes people angry or depressed or
make all product decisions to maximize user interactions, Zuckerberg said. When
it changed its News Feed algorithm to show more posts from friends and family a
few years back, the CEO added, the company did so knowing that people would
spend less time on the service.
Zuckerberg ended the note by encouraging Facebook’s workforce and expressing
his gratitude for their work.
Facebook is the world's most popular social media site. The company says it has 2.7 billion monthly active users. Hundreds of millions of people also use the company's other products, including WhatsApp and Instagram.
But it has been criticised on several fronts - from failing to protect users' privacy to not doing enough to halt the spread of disinformation.
Ms Haugen told CBS News on Sunday that she had shared a number of internal Facebook documents with the Wall Street Journal in recent weeks.
Using the documents, the WSJ reported that research carried out by Instagram showed the app could harm girls' mental health.
This was a theme Ms Haugen continued during her testimony on Tuesday. "The company's leadership knows how to make Facebook and Instagram safer, but won't make the necessary changes because they have put their astronomical profits before people," she said.
She criticised Mark Zuckerberg for having wide-ranging control, saying that there is "no one currently holding Mark accountable but himself."
Media caption,Facebook's Monika Bickert says commissioning research into issues shows the company is prioritising safety above profit
"Yesterday we saw Facebook taken off the internet," she said. "I don't know why it went down, but I know that for more than five hours, Facebook wasn't used to deepen divides, destabilise democracies and make young girls and women feel bad about their bodies."
The answer, she told senators, was congressional oversight. "We must act now," she said.
Mr Zuckerberg, in his letter, said the research into Instagram had been mischaracterised and that many young people had positive experiences of using the platform. But he said "it's very important to me that everything we build is safe and good for kids".
On Monday's outage, he said the deeper concern was not "how many people switch to competitive services or how much money we lose, but what it means for the people who rely on our services to communicate with loved ones, run their businesses, or support their communities".
IMAGE SOURCE,
Both Republican and Democratic senators on Tuesday were united in the need for change at the company - a rare topic of agreement between the two political parties.
"The damage to self-interest and self-worth inflicted by Facebook today will haunt a generation," Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal said.
"Big Tech now faces the Big Tobacco jaw-dropping moment of truth," he added, a reference to how tobacco firms hid the harmful effects of their products.
Fellow Republican Dan Sullivan said the world would look back and ask "What the hell were we thinking?" in light of the revelations about Facebook's impact on children.
In a statement issued after the hearing, Facebook said it did not agree with Ms Haugen's "characterisation of the many issues she testified about". But it did agree that "it's time to begin to create standard rules for the internet."
"It's been 25 years since the rules for the internet have been updated, and instead of expecting the industry to make societal decisions that belong to legislators, it is time for Congress to act," the statement read.
Zuckerberg rattled
Mark Zuckerberg's blog is lengthy and thoughtful. He doesn't name Frances Haugen - but he has clearly been rattled.
His main argument is that the research she leaked has been misrepresented by both her and the media. He argues that the negative internal research has been cherry-picked and positive conclusions brushed over.
Interestingly, he thinks this episode could have a chilling effect on internal research in companies - worried that bad conclusions might one day be leaked.
But there is of course a simple come back to this. Release the data.
Facebook and other social media companies don't have to do internal research; they could let their data be analysed independently.
To be fair to Facebook, the company does give researchers some access. However, only Facebook has the full spectrum of user metrics needed to fully analyse its effect on society.
His arguments too are at times overly simplified. Why would we want to make people angry, he asks.
I'm sure he doesn't. But it's been proven over and over again that social media that provokes any emotion, whether it be laughter, love or anger gets more engagement.
Zuckerberg believes passionately that Facebook is a force for good. It's becoming harder and harder to find people on Capitol Hill who think that.
WhatsApp, Instagram and Facebook have gone down in several parts for the world, users reported on Monday evening. A number of people have reported that the instant messaging platform and the social media applications are not working for them on Android, iOS and web platforms.Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp hit by global outage
I still have Manchester City as favourites to win the Premier League - my only concern is that they are having to work far too hard at times to score.
The level of play they have produced so far this season has not been matched by their goal return - and Sunday's thrilling 2-2 draw at Liverpool was another example of that.
As good as City were for long periods at Anfield - and they were very good indeed, and looked dangerous - there were times when I thought they were never going to find the net. Those questions over whether they need a striker appeared more prominent than ever.
I know City fans can say 'hang on, we already scored five against Norwich, and another five against Arsenal' - but those types of games are not going to define their season.
It is games such as this one and the one in France earlier in the week, where they dominated Paris St-Germain but were unable to score, that show they need a goalscorer in their side.
The question of how much difference a recognised striker would make for City is going to be flung at Pep Guardiola from now until the January transfer window. Unless they sign someone then, it will go on for the rest of the season too.
As good as their big summer signing Jack Grealish is, every time they don't win a game, people can ask 'did they really need him, and did they need a striker more?'
Jack Grealish played as a false nine in Manchester City's draw at Anfield
Guardiola's argument can be that they didn't need a striker to win the Premier League last season, but what he did have then was Ilkay Gundogan's goals - he was popping up all over the place.
Gundogan got 13 in the league last season, but only has one so far this time and is not fit at the moment. Raheem Sterling is not scoring right now either, so who is replacing all those goals - especially at big moments in the biggest games?
Yes, they came back from behind twice this time, but they should have been out of sight long before Liverpool took the lead.
'Liverpool have three lethal goalscorers'
The difference between the two teams on Sunday was this: even when Liverpool were being outplayed, I always thought that if they got one chance, they were going to take it.
I expected them to score because of the way Jurgen Klopp's side are set up in attack. Against City, they had three lethal goalscorers on the pitch in Sadio Mane, Mohamed Salah and Diogo Jota.
Compare that with the front three of Gabriel Jesus, Phil Foden and Jack Grealish that City went with. If you put all their goals together, they are simply not in the same bracket.
Premier League goals
Liverpool's front three
Man City's front three
103 - Mohamed Salah
52 - Gabriel Jesus
99 - Sadio Mane
16 - Phil Foden
28 - Diogo Jota
16 - Jack Grealish
Total = 230
Total = 84
Tactically, Guardiola got it spot on with the players he had at his disposal - but they could not find the finish their play deserved, so they didn't get the win I felt they deserved either.
Liverpool almost snatched all three points right at the end, but I felt they got away with it a little bit even by getting a draw. Everything that could have gone their way did.
They relied on moments of genius from two world-class players - Salah combined with Mane to put them 1-0 up, before scoring that absolutely phenomenal solo goal himself. They were both goals out of nothing, goals out of dreams.
City had the same situation in the Champions League on Tuesday when they absolutely battered Paris St-Germain. I don't know how they didn't score in that game, when a bit of genius from Lionel Messi helped make the difference.
This time it was Salah who had a 10-minute spell where he was just unplayable, but before then City had dominated Liverpool, which was really weird to see at Anfield.
I am used to seeing Klopp's side on the front foot no matter who is in town, but City found a way in the first half to nullify that altogether.
It felt as if Liverpool were trying to play counter-attacking football instead, but I am sure they were actually trying to play their usual style - either way, they couldn't get out. It was total domination by City.
Why a draw wasn't a fair result
Salah goal was absolutely world class - Klopp
Liverpool were suffocated and trapped and it felt as if they were sitting ducks. They were very fortunate to get in at 0-0 at half-time and even though they raised their levels after the break, they still lacked belief until Salah stepped up.
That is what Klopp was hoping for - usually he would be sitting there, watching his side in control of the game, but this time he was just relying on Salah or Mane doing something special. He found a way to get them in the game, and that is where Liverpool improved.
I know there will be an argument that a draw was a fair result in the end but I don't think it was - Liverpool should have had James Milner sent off, which would have changed things completely.
I love the Premier League, what a game! - Guardiola
Milner's first foul on Foden was outside the box, but he didn't attempt to play the ball so that should have been a red card. Foden didn't even get the free-kick though.
Then there was another Milner challenge on Foden where he did get booked - as well as the one shortly afterwards where he blatantly took him out but did not get a second yellow card.
I can completely understand why Guardiola was going ballistic on the touchline - it wasn't just the big moments from their superstars that got Liverpool a result on Sunday, the big decisions helped them too.
![Zuckerberg Responds to Claims That Facebook Prioritizes Profit as ‘Just Not True’]({"default":{"load":"default","w":"62","h":"42","src":"//img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/AAPb00q.img?h=416&w=624&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f&x=920&y=716"}})
