[ad_1]
Facebook CE Mark Zuckerberg once made a stark admission: that is good for the world is not necessarily what's good for Facebook.
On Wednesday, the UK Parliament released a truce of Confidential Internal Facebook emails it took from an app developer who received them as part of a legal battle with the Silicon Valley Tech giant. It was an extraordinary move, with the documents supposed to remain under seal by order of a California judge. The publication of the documents provided an unprecedented window in the Facebook business managers and their ruthless approach to competition.
In one email, sent by Zuckerberg on November 19, 2012, the chief executive officially discussed its attitude to provide third-party applications with access to its platform.
"Sometimes the best way to give people to share something is to have a developer build a special target app or network for the type of content and to make the App Social by having Facebook plug in it," he wrote.
However, he adds: "However, this may be good for the world, but it is not good for us, if people share back to Facebook and that content contributes to the value of our network. Finally, I think the purpose of the platform – Even the read page is to increase sharing back into Facebook. "
In other words, Zuckerberg said that the best option for people who want to share stuff is to do it with specialized apps, using Facebook tools to make them more social. But that does not align with Facebook's interest and aggressive growth strategy – so the company would instead push to bring this into a walled Facebook wallpaper, even if it's the harm of users and the "world."
It is a far cry from the affordable Affiliating Facebook that it hopes to make the world more open and connected.
It also contrasts with a memo top Facebook to explore Andrew "Bose" Bosworth written in 2016 to his colleagues in which he defended Facebook's growth and connecting people at no cost, even if people died.
"The ugly truth is that we believe in connecting people so deep that something that allows us to connect more people more often is * de facto * good.It is perhaps the only area where the metric does the true story as far as we are" "It's not something we do for ourselves, or for our stock price (though!) It's just what we're doing.
After Buzzfee issued the Memo in 2018, the Executive Director, said he did not believe what he wrote even at that time, and was intended to be provocative.
The attitude Zuckerberg expressed in the 2012 email is also not unique to him. In an email, Coo Sheryl Sandberg agreed with him: "I like full reciprocity and this is the heart of that."
Do you work on Facebook? Has a tip? Contact the Reporter via Signal or WhatsApp at +1 (650) 636-6268 using a non-working phone, email at [email protected], Telegram or Wechat at RobaEffice, or Twitter DM at @RobaEspice. (PR peaches by email only, please.) You can also contact business insider securely by Securedrop.
Here's the email exchange shared in the documents:
Email me 19 November 2012
After still thinking about the platform for a long time, I wanted to send a comment explaining where I'm leaning on this. This is not the last and we have a chance to discuss it in person before we decide it for sure, but since this is a complex, I wanted to write my thoughts. This is long, but hopefully helpful.
The quick summary is that I think we should go with full reciprocity and access to friends for no charge. Whole Reciprocatiz means that apps are required to provide any user who connects to a FB prominent option to share all their social content within the service (this is the whole content that is visible to more than a few people, but excluding 1: 1 or Small group articles) Back to Facebook. In addition, in the future, I also think we should develop a premium service for things like instant personalization and coefficient, but what can be different from the next release of the platform.
We are trying to give people to share everything they want, and to do it on Facebook. Sometimes the best way to give people to share something is to have a developer build a special target app or network for the type of content and to make the app company by having Facebook plug in it. However, this may be good for the world, but it is not good for us if people share back to Facebook and that content contributes to the value of our network. So finally I think the purpose of the platform – even the reading side is to increase sharing back into Facebook. & # 39;
… It seems like we need some way to fast app switch to the FB app to show a dialog on our site that lets you select which of your friends you want to apply to an app. We need to make sure this experience is actually possible to build and make as much as we want, especially on iOS where we are more constrained. We also need to figure out how we are going to pay for it. I want to make sure it's perfectly tied to pulling non-app friends of friends. & # 39; (Friend Information)
… What I'm assuming we'll do here is a few basic swab of API usage and once you pass a threshold you need to pay us some fixed amount to get to the next threshold or you get the limit to the lower Threshold.
Email from SS – November 19, 2012
I like full reciprocity and this is the heart of that.
[ad_2]
Source link
