Elon Musk's assessment of Mark Zuckerberg's company isn't that it's dangerous or evil but that it's lame, according to a tweet in which he joined the #DeleteFacebook chorus. Musk is right.
Mark Zuckerberg’s control over people’s photos of their dinner is giving Sacha Baron Cohen heart palpitations. The absolutely hilarious comedian (but not funny at all political activist) freaked out on Wednesday.
He tweeted a picture of Mark Zuckerberg as an all-powerful ancient Roman emperor. Cohen howled that one man controls “the information seen by 2.5 billion people.”
But Elon Musk stepped in on Saturday with a more accurate assessment of Facebook:
That’s more like it. Facebook isn’t dangerous or evil. But it is really lame.
Blah, blah, blah, Sacha. When this guy plays the clown, he’s a powerful social critic. When he tries to play a powerful social critic, he’s a clown.
(Which is the same mistake Eminem is making this year.)
Cohen represents Mark Zuckerberg as a Roman emperor. Ridiculous. Zuckerberg doesn’t have an army. Or slaves. Or the power of life and death over people.
He doesn’t even exercise “control of information.”
Users can pretty much post anything they want with just a few limits. And Cohen’s real criticism is that Mark Zuckerberg doesn’t exercise enough control over information. His solution is to build a vast social media censorship bureau.
So he’s trying to get Washington, D.C. (which actually has an army) to play Roman emperor and dictate orders to an internet company that lets people share photos and memes.
Sure Facebook has a vast number of users.
But it’s about as harmless as anything could be. And Facebook is not “the information.” It’s just one source of, mostly personal, information. Cohen’s just still mad that Trump won in 2016, and he and Hillary Clinton need a scapegoat. They want Mark Zuckerberg to police campaign ads, but television never has.
Elon Musk is right though. Facebook isn’t dangerous, but it’s certainly lame. It’s a time waster that appeals to narcissism and vanity. People use it to show off a version of themselves that they want others to believe is true about them. That’s lame.
They use it to leave passive aggressive gripes about someone to their whole friends list, without naming them, hoping the one person it’s intended for will see it. That’s lame.
Or they’ll use Mark Zuckerberg’s platform to leave a vague distress signal, and when anyone comments, they say, “I don’t want to talk about it.” Lame.
Or they use Facebook to stalk people. Creepy and lame.
Or they use it to pose like they are super knowledgeable and passionate about the #Controversy menu item of the moment, when they’re obviously neither. Also creepy and lame.
Here’s a really lame, and very mentally unhealthy one – Mark Zuckerberg’s platform is an outlet people use to post about things they did that they feel guilty about. So they can rewrite history in their favor and get someone’s approval to find relief from their guilt.
Never having to accept undesirable truths about oneself, and never having to change, in other words making oneself lame on purpose, is the end goal of crowd-sourcing the conscience on Facebook. I’ve seen it a lot. It’s bad for society. #DeleteFacebook
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of CCN.com.
Last modified: September 23, 2020 1:33 PM