Mark Zuckerberg has so far kept away from Washington, D. C. When Facebook's founder and CEO opened up last year to visit every U.S. state – to better understand people, as he said – capital city was not on its list. And when US Senate invited managers of Facebook, Google, and Twitter to a hearing about Russia's possible influence in presidential campaign, Chiefs of all three companies would rar send ir lawyers than to ask mselves.
But perhaps Zuckerberg will soon have to visit capital city. Since last weekend, pressure on Facebook is rising from all sides. A hearing of Zuckerberg, said Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar and her Republican colleague John Kennedy in a joint letter on Monday, would make it easier to understand "what is done to protect data of Americans and abuse To minimize ". And EU Parliament invited Zuckerberg to personally "make it clear that personal data is not used to manipulate democracy."
The latest reports, according to which data from around 50 million users were resold without ir consent to analysis firm Cambridge Analytica, have again brought network into needs. Behind Cambridge Analytica are former presidential adviser Stephen Bannon and conservative financier Robert Mercer. With data, company should have developed its own tools to influence Facebook users in US presidential campaign and before Brexit vote – and Facebook apparently had known about misuse of data in 2015, but did not inform its users. This could have offended company against British and American law. Since n, Facebook has changed rules for release of user data, but incident now brings company into trouble.
stumbled upon himselfIt could even turn into a turning point for 14-year-old company. This is at least believed by Robert Siegel, partner of venture capital company XSeed Capital in Silicon Valley and professor of microbiology and immunology at Stanford University. "Mark and Sheryl are two very capable managers," he says. "But challenge you're facing is bigger than anything you've ever had to do." If Facebook wants to continue to exist, it will have to change.
For years, business model of Facebook was mainly to grow. Since IPO in 2012 alone, number of users increased from about one billion to today 2.2 billion, while sales grew from five to 40 billion dollars and share price climbed from 38 to just under 170 dollars. Just six years ago, network on stock exchange was worth 104 billion dollars. Today it is almost 500 billion. Facebook has always quickly acquired competitors such as Instagram photo network, WhatsApp Messenger and VR experts Oculus VR to occupy new trends at an early stage and to eliminate competitors.
But in fast-paced ascent, Facebook stumbled upon itself, many say. The company is like a child who wakes up one day and is suddenly two meters tall, Siegel says. "There has never been a company that has had such a far-reaching influence so quickly." The size and ramifications of Facebook makes it more and more difficult to detect and respond to problems early on, says Paul Armstrong. He is founder of consulting firm here/forth, which advises companies on use of new technologies. At same time, however, Facebook's responsibility is immense. "What y do can have implications for whole market," Armstrong said.
Escape from responsibilityFacebook itself sees this differently so far – and has responsibility for any tampering. When accusations arose after US presidential election, Russian agents had used platform to influence election, called Zuckerberg this a "pretty crazy idea". For a long time he remained with this view. The Facebook bosses also repeatedly explain that y are a technology company, not a media company. That is why strict regulations regulating media companies in USA do not governed for Facebook.
This brings criticism to company – as well as its reaction to most recent accusations. The British Observer, who made story known on weekend alongside or leaves, had threatened Facebook with a lawsuit before publication. The account of Christopher Wylie, who worked for Cambridge Analytica himself and spoke with newspapers, deleted Facebook. And re is no fault in data abuse itself: it was done outside its own sphere of influence, company argued. Paul Armstrong doesn't believe this: "Even if it's not your fault, it's your responsibility," he says.
Date Of Update: 21 March 2018, 12:02
