Glad - shocked, actually - to hear that Glenn Beck was displeased with his fellow conservatives treatment of Mark Zuckerberg over reports that Facebook is too left-leaning in how it treats stories that make it into "Trending News."
As Glenn put it...
I sat there looking around and heard things like:
1)
Facebook has a very liberal workforce. Has Facebook considered
diversity in their hiring practice? The country is 2% Mormon. Maybe
Facebook’s company should better reflect that reality.
2)
Maybe Facebook should consider a six-month training program to help
their biased and liberal workforce understand and respect conservative
opinions and values.
3) We need to see strong and specific steps to right this wrong.
I sat there,
looking around the room at ‘our side’ wondering, ‘Who are we?’ Who am I?
I want to be very clear — I am not referring to every person in the
room. There were probably 25–30 people and a number of them, I believe,
felt like I did. But the overall tenor, to me, felt like the Salem Witch
Trial: ‘Facebook, you must admit that you are screwing us, because if
not, it proves you are screwing us.’
What
happened to us? When did we become them? When did we become the people
who demand the Oscars add black actors based on race?
Someone made a good point at the meeting. The invitation alone from Facebook is staggering. Conservative voices are rarely, if ever, invited to the table for an open dialogue.
Has Twitter,
Google, or any other Silicon Valley giant invited conservatives to
speak, to understand what we are feeling and seeing? Has any other
company or entity said, ‘Yes, many of our employees are liberal, many of
us don’t understand you, but our goal is to be an open platform where
ALL ideas (with limitations on hate and abuse, etc..) are welcome?’ Has
any other organization with 1.6 billion users admitted that while their
foundational values are the opposite of ours, it is bad business to cut
off a segment of the population?
I asked him if Facebook, now or in the future, would be an open platform for the sharing of all ideas or a curator of content? When I asked this question I told him I support his right to pick either direction. They are a private-owned company with investors who can decide what is right for them.
They can decide what is right based on profits or based on interests or on principles or on social justice. I hope that they want to be open, but I will fight for their right to be who they want to be even if I do not like their decision. Without hesitation, with clarity and boldness, Mark said there is only one Facebook and one path forward: ‘We are an open platform.’
He
went on to discuss that they are far from perfect, that they are always
working on the algorithms, the improvement of the newsfeed, the user
experience, etc. The goal, though, was very clear — to be an open
platform. When I looked into his eyes and his team’s eyes, I believed
him and I believed them. I hope I am not proven wrong.
How do I square
this with other accusations from people and organizations I respect like
CPAC and Matt Schlapp? I can’t. I don’t know what CPAC experienced, and
I don’t know if they are right or not. I have seen Steven Crowder’s
complaint, and I have no response other than I love Steven and hope he
gets the satisfaction he deserves. I have spoken to others off the
record who have made similar claims as CPAC’s. How do I square those
complaints? I can’t.
Maybe
one day, maybe one day soon, I will be able to synthesize these two
opposite perspectives. Maybe one party will show solid evidence or a
smoking gun. But until then, based on our research and my personal
experience with Facebook, I believe they are acting in good faith and
share some very deep, fundamental principles with people who believe in
the principles of liberty and freedom of speech.
Kudos to Glenn for admitting that Facebook is not an arm of the federal or state government, are not under any requirement that their views reflect all sides. As he rightly pointed out, Facebook is a privately-owned company beholden only to it's investors.
Fellow conservative pundit Tucker Carlson was grossed out by Beck's demeanor at the meeting & his comments:
I went to that meeting expecting Beck to cry, rend his garments
while quoting James Madison, but that's not at all what happened. He
began the most extended assiduous suck-up I think I've ever seen a grown
man commit. He acted like he was auditioning to be Mark Zuckerberg's
manservant — it was awe-inspiring. I don't know what his
agenda is; it's either he's looking to put his tanking Web properties
up for sale or he just can't help himself. There's a billionaire there,
so he sniffs the throne. Carlson said he was one person at the meeting who brought up increasing diversity at the company, and that Beck's description was a "total mischaracterization" of what he was trying to say.
"My point was a simple one, which is diversity is deeper than ethnicity," Carlson said. "You can look different but have the same values. That's not diversity; it's conformity. … You want people with different life experiences as a backstop against bad decision."
Carlson said he "despises" affirmative action but was "making a pretty conventional point."
"It's hardly a deep insight. [Beck] turns around and says 'You're acting like Jesse Jackson trying to shake down Facebook or demand quotas.' Which of course is the opposite of what I'm in favor of,' Carlson said.
I'm with Glenn - if something looks like a duck, talks like a duck & walks like a duck, I'm inclined to call it a duck. Everything Tucker Carlson wants sure sounds a lot like affirmative action, conservative style, to me. I do not know any business that would feel it needs people with "different life experiences" to protect against bad decisions. For one of the
Actually, Tucker was downright muted compared to Breitbart's reaction, building on its claim Glenn has a man-crush on Zuckerberg. The website was very clear in its Top Ten grievances against Facebook:
- Zuckerberg scolded Facebook employees for writing "All Live Matter" on a wall at the company's headquarters - - Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg scolded “malicious” employees for crossing out and replacing the phrase “Black Lives Matter” with “All Lives Matter” on a wall at the company’s Menlo Park headquarters. (Please note - they crossed out "Black Lives Matter," then replaced it with the other saying.)
- The Trending News editor is a major Hillary supporter.
- 80% of the private donations by Facebook employees go to liberal candidates & causes.
- Conservative organizations against immigration state that Facebook actively suppresses their content.
- Zuckerberg has a lobbying arm that actively promotes immigration reform
- Facebook plans to take an active roll in defeating Donald Trump. (Based on a screenshot of a question that an employee suggested asking, “What responsibility does Facebook have to prevent President Trump in 2017?” While "some employees apparently voted for the question to be posed to the CEO" it didn't make the cut.).
- Facebook openly works with the German government to stifle the speech of anti-immigration citizens.
- Mark Zuckerberg (a private citizen) blasted Donald Trump.
- Again, conservative sites feel they are being suppressed on Facebook.
- The site disputes Glenn Beck's claim that one FB employee is behind that report that the company intentionally suppresses conservative views, stories & share.
By the way, Glenn wasn't the only conservative present to believe that Mark Zuckerberg is acting in good faith. But Tucker & Brietbart didn't go after them. Maybe because they did express their admiration & faith in Zuckerberg so clearly.
I am not a Glenn Beck fan, but bravo for standing up for his conservative values.
No comments:
Post a Comment