By Paul Mulholland Mark Zuckerberg has been causing a stir since last November. By Christmas, he had declared himself to no longer be an atheist, and claimed religion to be very important in his life. He then declared, by way of New Year’s resolution, his intent to visit every state in the Union and meet their inhabitants. He was sure to stop by, and be noticed in, Iowa this last June to speak with truck drivers and small business owners, and at Glacier National Park to speak with Park Rangers about global warming last July. These are the actions of a man who is, at a minimum, exploring the option of a Presidential run.
For Zuckerberg to make sure his curious religious awakening and New Year’s resolution were noticed publicly and to make them less than two months after Donald Trump’s surprise election victory seems to require an explanation. The fact that Zuckerberg, born May 14, 1984, will finally pass the minimum age of 35 set by the Constitution to be the President by 2020 seems to supply it. There is one major concern that comes with a Zuckerberg campaign, and it technically comes whether or not he runs at all: to what degree can Zuckerberg get away with using Facebook to help win an election? Zuckerberg would certainly not be the first candidate to use his own assets to his advantage; President Trump used his personal aircraft and real estate to facilitate his own campaign. The degree to which Facebook as a social media service can influence an election is currently being investigated. At the time this article was published, Facebook is still turning significant information over to Congress concerning Russia’s influence in the last election. Facebook claims that it has detected roughly 3,000 ads totalling $100,000 in value, connected to some 470 fake accounts based in Russia. The ads mainly emphasized divisive “social” issues (as opposed to non-social issues?) such as immigration and race, and included Facebook’s most popular Texas secession page which was mysteriously taken down, suggesting that Russia’s goal was to further divide and isolate Americans politically. In large part due to the last election, Facebook has improved its capacity to detect and remove undesirable content. Last December, Facebook announced new features for users to report “fake news”, as well as fake accounts four months later. Zuckerberg was also overheard speaking to German Chancellor Merkel two years ago in regard to the Syrian refugee crisis, and he appeared to offer to censor bigoted posts. Facebook has also been accused of having intentionally and systematically suppressed conservative news in its trending stories. If Facebook were to become more politically engaged, perhaps as a result of its CEO running for president, this behavior could escalate. How Zuckerberg plans to counter any accusation of stifling his opponents on Facebook would be interesting to see. Facebook’s increasing capacity to control the information that appears before its users, as well as to influence what readers think of those stories by labelling them as disputed, can potentially give it enormous clout in American politics. According to Pew Research, 62% of Americans get news through social media. This potential problem is compounded by the monopolization of social media: if Zuckerberg used Facebook to favor himself or an ally in a presidential campaign, would it discourage Facebook’s users from using the site? Probably not, where would they go? YouTube is in a similar position; it has recently removed precious historical content from the war in Syria in the name of fighting terrorism which could have been used in war crimes investigations and to study terrorism, and has demonetized accounts that are not “brand friendly”. There is a concerning lack of competition and rivalry in social media markets. Dominance in most markets translates into political power, but dominance in the market of information dissemination could translate into still greater political power. Facebook deliberately influences the content shared on its network and is perfecting its methods. Facebook’s influence on political campaigns is formidable, as is becoming clear, and that will remain true whether Zuckerberg runs for president or not.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |