I think the author really underestimates how hard it is to stay relevant as a social network while trends and attitudes shift. So far Facebook's continued success has been pretty impressive. Some examples of great moves: Adopting oAuth to make Facebook the backbone of auth on the web, buying instagram when it was small, moving the company to be mobile first, buying whatsapp and making messenger a world class experience and now integrating the best features of Snap to counter that threat. The focus on messaging was especially brilliant given the current trend that people are moving away from social to a more messaging focused experience.<p>It's pretty amazing strategy regardless of how you feel about Facebook's recent issues. I would wager that >99% of CEOs would have failed to spot those trends in time and stay relevant.
>We’re not trying to harm Facebook, we’re trying to make it a stronger company.<p>Ha. That's a statement and a half. Does answering to shareholders make your company stronger? Lots would argue that too many shareholders focus on short term growth over long term strategy.
I think the bigger story here is the NYC Pension fund holding $895 <i>million</i> in FB stock.<p><a href="http://www.pionline.com/article/20180330/ONLINE/180339994/nyc-comptroller-calls-on-facebook-to-improve-transparency-accountability" rel="nofollow">http://www.pionline.com/article/20180330/ONLINE/180339994/ny...</a>
Parts of yesterday's Zuckerberg interview [0] highlighted and commented by Matt Levine today [1]:<p><i>Zuckerberg: You mentioned our governance. One of the things that I feel really lucky we have is this company structure where, at the end of the day, it’s a controlled company. We are not at the whims of short-term shareholders. We can really design these products and decisions with what is going to be in the best interest of the community over time.<p>Klein: That is one of the ways Facebook is different, but I can imagine reading it both ways. On the one hand, your control of voting shares makes you more insulated from short-term pressures of the market. On the other hand, you have a lot more personal power. There’s no quadrennial election for CEO of Facebook. And that’s a normal way that democratic governments ensure accountability. Do you think that governance structure makes you, in some cases, less accountable?<p>Zuckerberg: I certainly think that’s a fair question. My goal here is to create a governance structure around the content and the community that reflects more what people in the community want than what short-term-oriented shareholders might want. And if we do that well, then I think that could really break ground on governance for an internet community. But if we don’t do it well, then I think we’ll fail to handle a lot of the issues that are coming up.</i><p>[0]: <a href="https://www.vox.com/2018/4/2/17185052/mark-zuckerberg-facebook-interview-fake-news-bots-cambridge" rel="nofollow">https://www.vox.com/2018/4/2/17185052/mark-zuckerberg-facebo...</a><p>[1]: <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-04-03/it-s-just-another-day-at-the-office-for-spotify" rel="nofollow">https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-04-03/it-s-just...</a>
Question for anyone who knows the answer. Is there any legal way to force a majority controlling shareholder to do anything? I've read about Larry Page and Sergey Brin regularly ignoring shareholder requests to relinquish some of there powers over Google.
That's it for me, I'm off Facebook. This is one area where I see the importance of decentralisation - giving this much data to one company is dangerous. I'm part of the crypto-space and having a look there are quite a few competitors to facebook close to launching (sociall.io, indorse.io, steemit). Hopefully one of these will take down facebook. Data being owned by each individual will ensure a catastrophe like this one will never occurs again.
I don't disagree. I think Zuck is the face of the Facebook brand, but I don't think he's the right guy to run a company of this size. He was instrumental in two great acquisitions: WhatsApp and Instagram.<p>Other than that, many of his initiatives are nearly complete failures: Internet.org, Facebook drone internet, Oculus, Portal, Facebook Phone, the developer program, the cloning of Snapchat, his own national press tour, etc.<p>Not to mention, he's had numerous serious public-facing, brand-devaluing flubs that are literally too innumerable to list here.<p>For some reason, he doesn't surround himself with the best people anymore. I think because he's surrounded by an army of comms/PR people rather than actual scientists and engineers at this point.
From my personal thoughts, Zuckerberg acting like a dictator.<p>It’s shameful seeing how they started to infect the art of creativity.<p>Everything good comes with ethics, clearly @facebook @WhatsApp @instagram are not.
Zuckerberg controls the voting stock. He's not going anywhere unless he wants to go. He's one of the few CEO's that has that much control over his company.
Regardless of who’s giving the advice, it’s actually good advice.
The guy has completely lost touch with reality.
His comments on Apple and Tim Cook (who has never attacked Facebook directly, just replied to a specific question) show that he’s also losing the needed institutional composure his position requires.
Personally I thing his argument (we profile you for advertising ‘cause that’s the only way to give a service to poor people as well) is utter BS.
"Muzard warned that Zuckerberg is personally vulnerable if the "crisis of confidence lingers on. He might find it hard to hold on if shareholders start getting out. Things can happen very quickly. His equivalent at Uber did not survive a series of crises, and because <i>Zuckerberg personifies Facebook there is no real fall guy to take the bullet for him</i>."<p>He is therefore taking a big gamble by agreeing to testify before the US Congress, even if Facebook has also ramped up its lobbying of politicians.<p>...<p>"He must also have the right physical posture and tone of voice. Even with the best preparation, it will be a physically and emotionally exhausting," he predicted."<p>Source:<p><a href="https://www.fin24.com/Tech/Companies/facebook-gets-thumbs-down-for-handling-of-data-scandal-20180401" rel="nofollow">https://www.fin24.com/Tech/Companies/facebook-gets-thumbs-do...</a>
Personally, I think it's unwise to bet against Zuckerberg, and here's why I think so.
He has struggled with the Peter Principle, and IMHO beat it, which I gotta say is not an easy feat.
But he also bet big on things most wouldn't.<p>FB has gone though crazy struggles before, but if my understanding of both PG and YC is correct, you bet on the people, not the product. I have a feeling that if FB Inc has to reinvent itself, it will manage to do so.