Zuckerberg said it out loud: regulations will hurt Facebook, but they will be good for everyone

"I believe that good regulations can hurt Facebook in the short term, but in the long run it will be better for everyone, including us," wrote Mark Zuckerberg.

The Financial Times has made the news available to Mark Zuckerbeg, who in his text calls for regulation and draws a picture in which social platforms have to make difficult choices every day. It can even be said that these are ethical choices, forcing one to stand for one value against another. The head of Facebook says that services like Facebook must decide whether they choose "freedom of expression or security, privacy and law enforcement."

Zuckerberg admits: there are no easy answers.

Facebook's CEO goes further. He argues that large private companies should not make their own decisions on matters that relate to "basic democratic values." He also reminds that last year he called for regulations in the areas of elections, harmful content, privacy and data portability.

Here we come to a very interesting rhetorical procedure. While it is difficult to argue with Zuckerberg's introduction above, he further tries to cleverly shift responsibility. What does Facebook founder do? He points out that governments raise the issue of regulating content because they have no insight into Facebook systems.

We can further read that Facebook is the company that shares the most detailed reports about harmful content. Not only that, he shares with the state authorities the way his own systems work.

From this part of Zuckerberg's article emerges a picture of a company that is a model for others, and the fact that its medium is used to spread, for example, hate speech flows from legal imperfections. In other words: Facebook wants to make the world better, but this damn system stands in the way.

Facebook is apparently more transparent than television, press and online services. The CEO of the world's largest social networking site claims that this should also be a model in terms of political advertising. Facebook - according to Zuckerberg - indicates who pays for this type of advertising, how much it was spent on and how many recipients saw it.

Facebook boss raises important questions.

It is difficult, of course, not to notice that the basic goal of the article in FT is image building. However, the validity of the issues raised in the text cannot be denied. Zuckerberg, for example, asks about data ownership.

If I am sharing something with you, such as information on my birthday, should you be able to transfer this data to other services, such as the calendar application? Is this my data or yours? - considers the head of Facebook.

Almost exotic sounds the declaration in which Zuckerberg demands supervision and responsibility of technology companies explaining that people must have the feeling that they are subject to the law and will be responsible when they make a mistake.

Regulations will hurt Facebook, but in the long run they will be good for everyone.

Facebook CEO clearly emphasized that the regulations would hit his company. In the text in the Financial Times he tries to put himself above the role he plays. Therefore, it proves that in the long term regulations will benefit the society and the enterprise it manages. According to him, creating from democratic principles will be better than relying on standards developed individually by companies.

Zuckerberg also argues that he is not passively waiting for top-down legal solutions, but is trying to tackle the challenges that arise. In his opinion, the internet is a powerful force that strengthens societies in the social and economic dimension. "Regulations that protect people and support innovation can ensure that it stays that way," he writes.

I am usually very skeptical of Mark Zuckerberg's public ascent. The head of the technological giant is not using the media for the first time. A year ago, he published his text in opinion-forming newspapers. At that time Gazeta Wyborcza lent him a place in Poland. Honestly you have to notice a significant change in tone. While the article a year ago was a clear apology of Facebook, so in the material published now you can feel a note of responsibility for the world that Facebook co-created.

Whether we like it or not, social networking has become an important element of the landscape of our world.

They influence human purchasing and political decisions. They are communication platforms, but also channels for spreading information (and disinformation).

Clive Thompson, author of the great book " Coders ", draws attention to an important detail that escapes us when evaluating such characters as Zuckerberg. Looking at the pathologies that emerged with the appearance of Facebook, it's easy to accuse its creator of bad will. Meanwhile, Thompson notes that these negative aspects also result (and perhaps above all) from the social cross-section and the environment in which the creators of technology companies grew up. As an example, he gives a wave of hate that swept several years ago through Twitter and exposed the weaknesses of this medium. Thompson believes that social network employees have not created appropriate mechanisms to protect against hate speech because they have never experienced it. They lacked their imagination.

Reading Mark Zuckerberg's article I am a bit less skeptical, because I get the impression that the head of Facebook is slowly beginning to grow up to the role that he had to play. It's a good news.

Zuckerberg said it out loud: regulations will hurt Facebook, but they will be good for everyone