> I'm confused by the laser focus on FB all of a sudden.
You have to look at in the context of the 2016 election. Once it was discovered that the winning team utilized Facebook in a way the losing team had no concept of (or more likely they simply didn’t use said concept as effectively), Facebook has been singled out and targeted by most media outlets for being evil and in need of strict government regulations, to protect the children and democracy and society, among other things.
Yes, FB had negative press prior. But this was the clear turning point in press coverage and governmental oversight and it was like a light switch.
I can’t say I’m disappointed in the slightest about that, or that they’re wrong. I despise Facebook. But I do find the reasoning behind this all a very disturbing extension of the “cancel culture” we’re in today. The establishment doesn’t like not having a monopoly on the spread of information, and it is fighting back.
Your reasons are valid but way too U.S.-centric for me. I look at FB (the global company) in a global context and am shocked and disgusted at their "profits yes, responsibility no thanks" approach in, say, most non-English speaking countries around the World.
Because that’s too obvious and also Facebook’s userbase’s ideologies lean the opposite direction from the establishment, and Facebook is their best tool for sharing information that happens to run counter to what the establishment (media, government, etc) finds to be ideal.
Besides, there are only a few sites that most people ever visit. The internet is “small” now. Tackle the biggest threat, the rest will fall in line - likely with glee since they already enforce pro-establishment censorship policies as it is. Twitter, for example.
You have to look at in the context of the 2016 election. Once it was discovered that the winning team utilized Facebook in a way the losing team had no concept of (or more likely they simply didn’t use said concept as effectively), Facebook has been singled out and targeted by most media outlets for being evil and in need of strict government regulations, to protect the children and democracy and society, among other things.
Yes, FB had negative press prior. But this was the clear turning point in press coverage and governmental oversight and it was like a light switch.
I can’t say I’m disappointed in the slightest about that, or that they’re wrong. I despise Facebook. But I do find the reasoning behind this all a very disturbing extension of the “cancel culture” we’re in today. The establishment doesn’t like not having a monopoly on the spread of information, and it is fighting back.