“The trust people place in us is the most important part of what makes Facebook work,” she said, adding that the company welcomed a discussion with Mr. Durbin and others who have an interest in this matter. “As demonstrated by our response to threats in Tunisia, we take this trust seriously and work aggressively every single day to protect people.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/business/media/15facebook.html?scp=2&sq=news%20about%20the%20media%20and%20politics&st=cse
In this article Facebook is very conflicted- not really sure whose side to take- if they support the activists, the protestors, the people who don't want any of it up... they just are not consistent.Facebook is struggling with how they feel about supporting activists and letting them get their voice known through Facebook.
I also found it really interesting that both Youtube and Twitter are both sites that have a clear stance and are trying to help anyone spread the world about protests- Twitter is outwardly trying to help anyone who is protesting- even when the Internet was down in Egypt, Twitter had people record messages to get them out to the public.
I don't know what Facebook's intentions are and because of that I am torn as to how I feel about them not taking a stance and just doing things " to keep peoples trust."
One side is if they feel ambivalent about taking a stance because they respect everyone and they feel as though there is freedom of speech and everyone has a chance to let their voice be heard and Facebook is a good forum for that, then that is one side or the second side is if it because they want everyone to be on Facebook and they don't care even if they think its out of hand, if its getting more hits or ratings up its fine- then that I feel is the wrong way to handle things.
No comments:
Post a Comment