Facebook has become the center of attention lately in their lack of policing hate speech and failure to label posts that break Facebook’s policies. In response to this lack of policing, hundreds of companies have joined together in a month-long boycott refraining from advertising on Facebook and its sister company, Instagram. Some big-name companies include Adidas, Clorox, Unilever, Ford, Coca-Cola, Starbucks and more. This campaign has even affected Facebook’s stock, dropping it roughly 8% since it gained momentum.
“The top 100 advertisers on Facebook contribute just 6%” of the company’s revenue. Do you think this movement is enough to see some major change in the way Facebook polices its content? Do you think these advertisers are replaceable and Facebook could survive without them? Or more simply, do you think Facebook cares?
It’s great to see a lot of large companies banding together to try to make a difference. I think we would need to see a lot more advertisers sign on to really make any difference here given the sheer size of Facebook. This wouldn’t be the first movement to try to change the social media giant’s policies. Small content publishers have been wrecked by Facebook and Google, forcing the shutting down of some sites that used to be pretty prominent and it all has to due with the rising costs of advertising as well as any sites that push people off of Facebook’s site. While this isn’t quite the same thing, it’s not been talked about much in the media since Facebook is so large and can brush these things right off. So I believe that in order to force them to make changes, and for Facebook to care at all, they’ll need to see a much larger loss in revenue from ad dollars.
I agree with the above. Facebook is large and has established their positioning, so it would take a very very large loss to see the change. However, since these are some big name companies, I wonder if we will see more companies continue to follow their lead in the coming days and weeks. However with all that is going on in the world, it’s difficult to know if this will get swept under the rug when a new story emerges.
I sure hope it doesn’t get swept under the rug. Too many things these days are getting swept under the rug and that’s not a good trend. We all need to be accountable for our actions!
I know Facebook is holding strong but their cages have been rattled. The article above states that the vice president of global marketing solutions at Facebook publicly posted: “These last few weeks have been the hardest stretch of my professional career, with endless days, sleepless nights and more than a few tears.”
If just a few more large advertisers pulled out, that just might make the difference!
We know it’s probably the hardest to be the first company to remove its advertising so the hard part has already been done. Other companies will now need to address it because either way pulling your advertising or not pulling it will be making a statement.
Lastly, the users need to start pulling out as well. If there aren’t users, there will be no one to see the advertising. We are all in this together if we expect change.
Facebook just had blowout earnings, so they didn’t even feel it. I don’t like these platforms being arbiters of political speech, but I do think content that is overtly out of line needs to be addressed regularly. I watched CEO Zuckerberg’s testimony on the Hill last week and he seems to have a good handle on it.
IndyPat, it’s an interesting legal predicament isn’t it?
When the 1st amendment was written, no one anticipated that the private sector would contain the main mediums for public discourse. If a private entity has the right to manage itself, and select what content it allows and doesn’t allow within it’s space, is that a violation of free speech, or a practice of private property rights?
It’s an interesting legal debate that I think needs to be discussed more. If a social media platform, as a private entity has a product that is just content, then does it not have a right to regulate what content it shows or doesn’t show? Clearly, if the government silences voices, that is a violation of free speech, no question. But what if a private company does it?
Or is there another question to add a layer to this debate? Is the private sector now becoming so powerful that it can censor and control public discourse for its own gain and interest while the government can only wag it’s finger?