An Ugly Truth

As someone who has read way more than I should on Facebook I'd say that it is 4 stars for me personally since a lot of this was retread. However if someone is new to this I'd say it's 5 stars (why I rated it as such) since it provides a very well written and clear path through the important parts of Facebook's controversies. I still did learn stuff. Most of the Facebook histories I've read focus much more on Zuck's early history and him as the main character, of sorts, through the various episodes. This is the first one that really emphasized the other people involved this much, including and especially Sheryl Sandberg. This provided a lot more dimension to how certain decisions played out, who was influencing Zuckerberg when, and then how the rest of the Facebook team on high and in the masses through Tribe reacted to things unfolding. If you care more about the history of Facebook's controversial events this is even better than Facebook The Inside Story. That book was better in terms of providing a lot more details about Facebook pre-history and very early eras though. Between both books I think you'll get a full picture of the company, the people at the helm, and the history of major events and controversies in its history.

This book was tough to read at this time. I just couldn't get away from all the bad because it's been in this book and in the news pretty steadily over the past weeks. Coincidentally, I've been reading this book at the same time a whistleblower brought the internal documents proving that FB doesn't really care about anything but engagement, which is much better to liken to addiction. The comparison to big tobacco seems pretty accurate (from the whistleblower, not the book).

Essentially, Zuckerberg wants the appearance that Facebook is taking concerns about election interference and increases in teen suicide and calls to violence on his platform seriously, but he doesn't actually want to do anything about it because doing something would affect engagement and therefore the bottom line.

One item of interest comes from the GOP's line of attack toward FB. By claiming that FB favors liberal content and silences conservative voices, they have forced the platform to the right. It's hard to say that FB silences conservative voices when seven of the ten most shared articles come from conservative news sources, mostly Fox.

I agree with the whistleblower's suggestion that Section 230 should be modified to exempt algorithms from lawsuits. Facebook and other social media might be a lot more careful about what their algorithms amplify if they knew they'd get sued for amplifying lies and disinformation. Personally, I'd like to see FB go back to a chronological timeline. And, it might not hurt if Facebook eliminated sharing posts. Users can't share posts in Instagram, and Instagram is still quite popular. Finally, no more political ads. Criminey, we get enough as it is. The election cycle never ends.

Let's go back to the days where folks updated Facebook with information about their eating habits and family parties.