Just keep talking, the idea seems to be, and it doesn't matter what you say. The statements Facebook issues aren't meant to convey any real information - they're just blasts from a verbal fire extinguisher, a cloud of words intended not to inform, but to smother. It just views the complaints as little fires that need to be put out. One gets the impression that Facebook doesn't take any of this stuff very seriously. They've said, when the current crisis began, that there was nothing wrong with the policy itself - the problem was simply that Facebook hadn't explained it well enough. They've claimed that they're only changing privacy policies because that is what member want. team.įacebook's real problem now is that Zuckerberg and his PR reps have made so many ludicrous statements that it's hard to believe anything they say. Nevertheless, of all the newspapers in the world, why choose the one that's owned by one of your board members? Chalk up another clunker for the Facebook p.r. In other words we are asked to believe that though Graham and Zuckerberg are close friends, and presumably Zuckerberg has been consulting with Graham (and other board members) over the privacy crisis, Zuckerberg and his team never mentioned to Graham the fact that Facebook was going to publish an op-ed in Graham's newspaper. Graham, chairman of the Post, also sits on Facebook's board of directors and has been an important mentor to Zuckerberg.Įveryone involved, including Graham himself, says nobody pulled any strings, that Facebook just submitted the piece to the Post without Graham's knowledge, and the Post chose to run it because it was of interest to readers. That is the narrative that will be attached to this latest episode, and it's not a good one for Facebook.Īs for that vapid op-ed earlier in the week, Facebook might also have thought twice about publishing the piece in The Washington Post, since Donald E. The perception is that Facebook got caught doing something wrong, and sheepishly backed down. The real issue is one of perception, which is that sure, Facebook made some changes, but only because they had no choice. From my perspective a better policy would just to have everything set to private, by default.īut at this point the details of the policy aren't even the real issue. For one thing, if you want to keep Facebook from sharing your info with Facebook apps and connected Web sites, you have to opt out - meaning, the default setting is you're sharing. The company did revise its privacy policy this week, and some privacy experts were appeased, while others said Facebook still has more work to do. The real point of his essay, in fact, was that Facebook has no intention of rolling back the stuff that people are really upset about. He's many things, but stupid isn't one of them. The problem is the privacy policy itself. He vows to remedy that by making things simpler.īut the real problem isn't the complexity of Facebook's privacy controls. In the op-ed, Zuckerberg pretends to believe that the biggest concern users have is how complicated Facebook's privacy controls are. Best example is an op-ed that Zuckerberg published earlier this week in the Washington Post, a classic piece of evasive corporate-speak that could only have been written by PR flacks. Instead of restoring trust in Facebook, they just make the company seem more slippery and sneaky. Instead of making things better, Facebook's spin doctors just keep making things worse. In fact the most amazing thing about Facebook's current crisis over user privacy is how bad the company's PR machine is. Facebook issues software#The social media giant has not elaborated on the reason for the latest glitch.Facebook's 26-year-old founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg may be a brilliant software geek, but he's lousy at public relations. That was caused by backend changes that caused "issues" that interrupted the flow of traffic between routers in Facebook's data centers around the world, Facebook said. Meta's properties last had major issues in October when users were unable to access Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp and Messenger for several hours. The Facebook Feed is the main stream of posts of people that you follow. CNBC also witnessed the issue when checking the Feed earlier Wednesday. In an updated statement, a Meta spokesperson said a "configuration change caused some people to have trouble with their Facebook Feed." The spokesperson added that the issues have been resolved.ĭowndetector, a service where people can log problems and outages with websites, had thousands of reports of issues with Facebook, with 81% of complaints related to the Feed.Ī number of users commenting on Downdetector and Twitter reported an issue where they would see comments posted by random people on celebrity accounts appearing on their own Feed.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |