As Facebook Crumbles, the Case for Breaking It Up Is Weaker Than Ever –

Facebook suffered a major outage on Monday, after a miserable month with negative news coverage due to various misdeeds revelations. Facebook may not be so dominant after all. Therefore, government force is completely unnecessary to limit it.

All apps in the Facebook family—including Instagram and WhatsApp—went down simultaneously on Monday. They were back up by the evening but not enough to save Facebook’s stock which dropped 4.9 percent. In just hours, Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Facebook, lost over $6 billion. Facebook workers couldn’t get into the headquarters of Facebook because the security systems that were connected to the network caused the outage.

The company’s recent woes have fueled a new wave of criticisms from tech skeptics on both the left and right who want the government to either break up Big Tech, take away its liability protection, or either prohibit—or possibly Require!—so-called misinformation on the platforms. A major theme of the Big Tech battles is that former President Donald Trump, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.Everyone wants to pursue the companies but often for opposing and sometimes conflicting reasons.

Conservatives think the platforms engage in too much moderation and have corrupted democracy in favor of 2020 election winner Joe Biden; liberals think Facebook doesn’t practice nearly enough moderation—allowing right-wing violence and faulty info about quack COVID-19 cures to spread—and also corrupted U.S. democracy in favor of 2016 election winner Donald Trump. It is probably more telling about both parties that it says about Facebook than about the extremist and opportunistic individuals of each political faction who like to point fingers at Big Tech for all of their problems.

If there’s one fear that unites the left and right, though, it’s moral panic about social media—Instagram, in particular—causing feelings of depression and anxiety among teenage girls. It’s not a new concern: Jean Twenge, a psychologist, has written about this for many years. Jonathan Haidt is also a co-author. The coddling of America’s MindIt’s a well-respected figure by libertarians and thinks that there might be something to it. It received an important narrative boost when a former Facebook employee voiced his opinion as “whistleblower”, and shared a number of details. The Wall Street Journal. The most significant of these scoops—as judged by the fact that it prompted an immediate (and, per usual, wildly embarrassing) Senate hearing—concerned Facebook’s internal efforts to gauge Instagram’s ill-effects on the mental wellness of young people.

Frances Haugen was the whistleblower. 60 minutes Sunday. He will also testify in front of Congress Tuesday. Haugen and Congressman Jim McGovern for their assistance. JournalBased on a report by, it is known that Facebook conducted a survey of teens to find out how they felt about their use of the platform. Their findings weren’t encouraging, as one in five teens said Instagram makes them feel less good about themselves. Teens who have mental illnesses said that the platform made it harder to live their lives.

Ostensibly, the problem with Instagram is that it promotes social competition—the race for likes and comments—among users posting artificial, filtered images of themselves, which may exacerbate body images issues. While this is not new, it’s been a problem with Instagram for years. Even though glossy magazines have been accused, no one mentions the existence of existential threats. Cosmopolitan Or Teen Vogue. Teens often feel depressed and miserable in high school. But, as Mike Solana wrote in his excellent piece on the Anti-Facebook Crusade, nobody is asking that the Secretary of Education be taken before Congress.

How many teenagers are in mental distress and struggling to support their families? Are there many teens who are experiencing difficulties with friends or their crush? What percentage of students are having difficulties in school? To the question of “does high school make you want to kill yourself,” how many suicidal teenagers would answer “yes” — emphatically? Nearly all. The next question is when were they? [we]Do you want to drag the Secretary for Education in front Congress and ask him why he isn’t solving depression?

Solana said that Haugen had not told us much about Instagram and Facebook: It was a case of self-branding. Since the mainstream media is already inclined to believe the very worst about social media—a disfavored upstart competitor—anyone who comes forward and tells the media exactly what they want to hear on this subject is going to be celebrated as a hero. Haugen has been praised as a brave truth-teller. However, her viewpoint is the most popular in progressive circles. Facebook encourages hatred and disinformation and holds too much power.

This last accusation makes it clearer than ever that the contrary is true. Facebook is unlikely to hold a dominant or unassailable place in the modern world. The company is desperate to attract the sorts of users—young people, mostly—who provide cultural cache and excite advertisers and investors. This is becoming a losing battle. Facebook—or “Boomerbook” as some call it—has never been less popular with the kids, and even Instagram faces tremendous competition from Snapchat, TikTok, and whatever cool new thing is coming along next.

Facebook is more concerned with preserving irrelevance than dominating new markets, and that is the truth of Facebook’s need for young users. The New York Times Kevin Roose writes an article which sounds very pessimistic about the company’s future health. Facebook’s research shows a very clear picture, but it is not one that will make you happy.

Anti-tech crusaders from both left and right have been telling the public for years that Facebook was a threat. They can stop it only by aggressive government action, such as Section 230 reform and antitrust legislation. Despite repeated threats, politicians never made good on their promises to do something—and yet Facebook is undeniably in a much weaker position. It’s difficult to see the future. However, it is even more difficult to imagine the company making a comeback and being a trend-setting force once again. The expectations that Facebook would be able to establish itself as a market leader and withstand all odds suddenly seem absurd.

Facebook could soon be in the situation of You will need To maintain its dominant position, the government intervenes. Recall that the company actually voted in favor of Section 230 reform, a federal statute which limits online platform’s legal liability.

“I believe that Section 230 would benefit from thoughtful changes to make it work better for people, but identifying a way forward is challenging given the chorus of people arguing—sometimes for contradictory reasons—that the law is doing more harm than good,” noted Zuckerberg during a March 2021 appearance before Congress.

Facebook may actually be able resist competition by altering its liability protections. Facebook’s armies might be better equipped to handle moderation requirements that are higher than those of smaller social media companies like Twitter. Facebook has the advantage of being able to influence and direct any new governmental agency that is created to implement a modified Section 230. Facebook supporters should support the idea of ongoing relevance and want it to pick the new federal bureaucrat responsible for regulating Big Tech. However, any person who believes the company should enjoy fair competition could prefer that the matter be left to the government.

This is my new book Tech PanicSubtitled: Facebook and Future Fears:These are the facts. These events provide concrete and additional reasons. Zuckerberg’s platform does not control our lives, economy or democracy. The mainstream media’s deceitful attempts to convince us otherwise must be questioned. It’s easier To dismiss the light of recent events