The Moral Bankruptcy of Facebook: It Doesn't Have to Be This Way
Issue 61
We can’t talk about creating conscious politics in America without eventually talking about creating conscious business as well. Since Facebook whistleblower, Frances Haugen, put unconscious business on the political front burner last week by appearing on “60 Minutes” and testifying (under oath) in the U.S. House of Representatives, I take it as an invitation to look at it all through our conscious practice lens. Happy Sunday.
Just as I’m always harping that conscious politics is a vehicle for creating a world that works for everyone so, too, is conscious business. Conscious businesses not only “do no harm,” they add value to society. Facebook has made clear since its start that it most assuredly does not practice this, its absolute right.
Armed with a trove of internal documents — her right under whistleblower laws — Haugen describes in her televised interview what I would characterize as a disconnect between an entity, Facebook, that knows it does some kind of profound harm to some kinds of people and societies but refuses, nonetheless, to prioritize eliminating said harm. It’s not that it’s not a priority, it says, it’s just not the priority; the priority it doesn’t ever say, is profit. (Not, say, compassion.)
Just as I’m always harping that conscious politics is a vehicle for creating a world that works for everyone so, too, is conscious business. Conscious businesses not only “do no harm,” they add value to society.
Two things. One, I could have written that characterization/opinion/observation/judgment about Facebook ten years ago and, two, this is not ever going to be an argument against financial profit. I am a social entrepreneur and an unwavering advocate for conscious capitalism where profits are a critical and welcome part of the game. That said, let’s take a quick gander through our conscious lens to see what abject unconsciousness sounds like via a few excerpts from Facebook’s written responses to Ms. Haugen’s claims on “60 Minutes” last week, starting with a clip from the first part of its statement:
“…We continue to make significant improvements to tackle the spread of misinformation and harmful content. To suggest we encourage bad content and do nothing is just not true."
Take responsibility! If you encourage content that engages users the most and you know that what engages them most is “bad,” as Haugen contends, you encourage bad content. If your efforts to counter it are anemic because of subservience to a different intention e.g., profit, just say so because intentions matter. You are absolutely not doing enough, which can easily look like not doing anything. To be present is to accept this reality.
On the claim that internal research showed that the company is not doing enough to eradicate hate, misinformation, and conspiracy:
“…If any research had identified an exact solution to these complex challenges, the tech industry, governments, and society would have solved them a long time ago..”
First, the charge that Facebook is not doing enough, is not quite addressed. As for the research identifying “an exact solution,” give me a break. That is not the intent of such studies. Typically, research like this is intended to inform future action. The unanswered charge is that it is not being acted upon in a way that solves the problem. Opacity and obfuscation are inauthentic, unconscious responses.
On the claim that incentives within Facebook are misaligned, and the desire for engagement on the platform and profit outweighs safety in some instances:
"Hosting hateful or harmful content is bad for our community, bad for advertisers, and ultimately, bad for our business.”
This is patently untrue. Given that Facebook’s investors and board members represent the elite of America’s business community, it would not be where it is today if their policies and practices were not good for business, which to them means good for profits. One of Haugen’s arguments is that there is a chronic difference between what’s good for the public and what’s good for the company. It’s Facebook’s right, again, to do what’s best for profits — it’s what old-paradigm corporations are supposed to do. But clearly “bad” content is good for business.
Additional statement on Facebook's response to dangerous organizations before the January 6 Capitol insurrection:
"We banned hundreds of militarized social movements, took down tens of thousands of QAnon pages, groups and accounts from our apps, and removed the original #StopTheSteal Group. This is in addition to our removal, and repeated disruption of various hate groups, including Proud Boys, which we banned in 2018…”
If there are a hundred thousand gallons of water that have to be removed from the basement and you remove 37,000 gallons and quit, you are not solving the problem. And if the hundred thousand are there because of your actions and you refuse to take responsibility for it, well, we’ve seen this movie a thousand times.
The point I wish to impart today is it does not have to be like this. I jumped out of my skin with enthusiasm and excitement when the “60 Minutes Overtime” clip online ended with Haugen saying this:
“We need to declare moral bankruptcy….Moral bankruptcy is an opportunity for Mark, for Facebook, to come in and say we completely messed up. Some of it’s our fault, some of it’s not our fault, but we’ve gotten in so far over our heads that we need a reset. Or, we’re sorry, we did this thing but we’re trying to do better. But what he really needs to do is come out and level and say we have to reorganize the company. We have to admit that people don’t want to work here right now and figure out solutions on that. Because if they don’t do that thing, they’re just going to continue to get worse and the process is just going to reinforce and reinforce.”
Exactly! There are, in America in 2021, well-established paths and protocols for companies and industries to start as or transform into conscious businesses. The consultant/trainer in me chomps at the bit. Conscious Capitalism. Triple Bottom Line (TBL). Quadruple Bottom Line! B Corporations. Transforming its business into a conscious one is the “exact solution” Facebook says does not exist. Then again, it’s not the kind of thing an old-consciousness business would tend to research.
NOTE: Save the date: Tuesday, October 19, 2021 will be our next Conscious Politics Monthly Online Drop-In, the live, interactive version of this newsletter where we talk about what you want to talk about. Free for newsletter subscribers. Sign-up next week.
I love the water in the basement analogy. I see a future side (or right up front) hustle for you to add to your repertoire: Conscious Business Strategy 101 for new or exisiting businesses lead by those who are passionate about changing the landscape and how they directly affect it with their products or services.