More on Zuckerberg

Published by

Clarissa

September 22, 2017

Oligarchic regimes with no freedom of speech are very profitable for Zuckerberg. Once Putin destroyed the Russian blogosphere, all of the talented authors who used to post content on their blogs (and make money from that) were forced to go to Facebook and work for Zuckerberg for free. So why would Zuckerberg not be in favor of such a setup?

What’s curious is that even in view of the recent revelations as to FB’s complicity in subverting the recent elections, there are no calls to resist Facebook, or at least give a little bit less of free labor to a billionaire who did so much to saddle us with Trump.

Rate this:

3 responses to “More on Zuckerberg”

Shakti

September 22, 2017

To not answer your question(s):

Facebook is at the point where it hopes to make money by buying other platforms. Facebook now owns Instagram and Whatsapp among other platforms. This is to hedge against the decline in usership. How many people are on Facebook simply because of user density? And how many advertisers will leave because of younger people in the US not using Facebook much?

Verizon owns most of Yahoo which owns Tumblr.

Currently the new hotness is people using Paypal, cash.me and square cash links. Another popular thing I see people doing is having a Patreon.

I remember when I read Shakesville Melissa McEwan would post these quarterly fund drive threads and lecture people about paying for her blog posts. I’m a little shocked she didn’t start a Patreon and tier content for all of her whinging.

LikeLike

Reply
Anon

September 22, 2017

It’s the consumer mindset. Protesting to resist a government is easy, and does not involve even a minor hardship; resisting a company like Uber which has an alternative Lyft is also easy. But resisting facebook involves an actual “hardship” for the consumer, which explains why. After all, if there is no facebook to be visited, how will the savvy consumer engage in political activism?

LikeLiked by 1 person

Reply
1. Clarissa
  
  September 22, 2017
  
  Absolutely. That’s precisely what it is. A minor inconvenience that abstaining from FB would cause is not to be tolerated.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply

Clarissa's Blog