Remember how, over approximately 52 minutes in 2010, the reptilian pulling levers in Mark Zuckerberg’s brain briefly fled his host and left a trembling wet man onstage at the mercy of Kara Swisher? You remember:
Yesterday, that fateful conversation about privacy has turned ten years old. At the time, Zuckerberg was semi-recently apologising for Facebook Beacon, the tool which showed everyone on Facebook your internet activity. That raised an uproar and a class-action lawsuit, and Zuckerberg’s sworn statement that he had learned lessons, but history has proven otherwise.
Closer to the 2010 interview, the media circulated an alleged record of Zuckerberg’s Harvard-era IM’s revealed his plan to “fuck over” (his words) the Winklevoss brothers, for whom he was creating a Facebook-adjacent dating site. And days before the interview, Zuckerberg was denying that Facebook shares data with advertisers. Commenting on the interview at the time, TechCrunch wrote that Zuckerberg “wasn’t exactly forthcoming” about privacy changes and relied on “well-worn anecdotes detailing why sharing is important.”
Fast forward to the same day, ten years later...
Recode transcribed the full leaked audio from Mark Zuckerberg’s Tuesday meeting with employees, revealing that he’s put a lot of thought into divesting from his soul. The entire thing is worth examining at length, but here are just a few of the elaborate loopholes he’s thought up just for Trump:
- The “when the looting starts, the shooting starts” post wasn’t inciting violence.
- It’s “clearly a troubling historical statement and reference” but “has no history of being read as a dog whistle for vigilante supporters to take justice into their own hands.”
- Instead, it was a “discussion” about the use of “force,” which Facebook allows for states.
- It could have been a “prediction” of violence, which is okay.
- He admits “there is no newsworthiness or politician exception to our policies on an incitement of violence.”
- By the way, “Twitter didn’t take it down.”
The transcript confirms civil rights leaders’ conclusion, about a separate meeting, that his explanations for leaving Trump’s post up were “incomprehensible,” and that he “did not demonstrate understanding of historic or modern-day voter suppression, and he refuses to acknowledge how Facebook is facilitating Trump’s call for violence against protesters.”