- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Lindsey Graham grills Zuck at senate hearing about Facebook being a monopoly
Posted on 5/4/19 at 9:53 pm
Posted on 5/4/19 at 9:53 pm
12
Posted on 5/4/19 at 10:01 pm to FlexDawg
Tldw
Facebook can either choose to be a platform or a publisher.
One has freedom as a core principle.
The other is what Facebook has become and therefore gets regulated as a consequence.
Zuck better think long and hard about his future.
Facebook can either choose to be a platform or a publisher.
One has freedom as a core principle.
The other is what Facebook has become and therefore gets regulated as a consequence.
Zuck better think long and hard about his future.
Posted on 5/4/19 at 10:02 pm to FlexDawg
Maybe there was more context that in tht clip, but LG should have let Zuck expound a little on the categories. Im not learned in this area, but I assume Zuck would have gone into advertising aspect as well as the "social" part. Targeted advertising. And whatever other "categories" yall prob know that I dont.
Posted on 5/4/19 at 10:22 pm to FlexDawg
It’s a shame a senator doesn’t know what a monopoly is.
Posted on 5/4/19 at 10:38 pm to FlexDawg
Im not a fan of Zuck, but I think he could wipe the floor with anyone if given more latitude to speak, including my man Lindsey.
A lot of their business is ad revenue, and that absolutely puts them in competition with Google and others. I don't like Lindsey's angle, which seems to be any company that can provide a specific set of services that others don't is a monopoly.
My company does things that many others do, but we are the only company in America that does the specific combination of services we do. That doesn't mean we are a monopoly, and it certainly doesn't mean we lack competition.
A lot of their business is ad revenue, and that absolutely puts them in competition with Google and others. I don't like Lindsey's angle, which seems to be any company that can provide a specific set of services that others don't is a monopoly.
My company does things that many others do, but we are the only company in America that does the specific combination of services we do. That doesn't mean we are a monopoly, and it certainly doesn't mean we lack competition.
Posted on 5/4/19 at 10:59 pm to GRTiger
quote:
My company does things that many others do, but we are the only company in America that does the specific combination of services we do. That doesn't mean we are a monopoly, and it certainly doesn't mean we lack competition.
It’s Facebook’s market share that makes them monopolistic. Even though they have competition, they are basically colluding with Twitter and YouTube (Google) When it comes to censorship of especially conservative voices.
Google’s Search Engine market share is well beyond the threshold of being a trust.
Posted on 5/4/19 at 11:10 pm to GRTiger
quote:
m not a fan of Zuck, but I think he could wipe the floor with anyone if given more latitude to speak, including my man Lindsey.
I'm not sure about that one. Lindsay almost looked bored with this.
And the Zuck didn't do much to dispell his android image.
Posted on 5/4/19 at 11:21 pm to FlexDawg
Graham doesn't do a good job of describing Facebook's services. If Congress can't define Facebook's services to state what they have a monopoly on, it should be pretty difficult for them to claim that Facebook has a monopoly.
It would be like claiming that TigerDroppings has a monopoly because its users can only access its features on TigerDroppings.
I don't like Facebook's political stance, censorship or algorithms, but I'm not going to play the Dems' game of trying to regulate something simply because I don't like how people are running it.
It would be like claiming that TigerDroppings has a monopoly because its users can only access its features on TigerDroppings.
I don't like Facebook's political stance, censorship or algorithms, but I'm not going to play the Dems' game of trying to regulate something simply because I don't like how people are running it.
This post was edited on 5/4/19 at 11:22 pm
Posted on 5/4/19 at 11:27 pm to TerryDawg03
quote:
by TerryDawg03
Agree, and that seems to be a problem with Congress as a whole....they should be inquiring more as opposed to lecturing. Of course I see this as being much, much worse on the left. But hell, the witnesses are there to inform them about things they need informing about...let them inform. THEN get after them if need once they are as knowledgeable as can be under the circumstances
Posted on 5/4/19 at 11:34 pm to Sunbeam
quote:
I'm not sure about that one. Lindsay almost looked bored with this.
And the Zuck didn't do much to dispell his android image.
If we got them across a table with equal terms, it would be ugly. That is true of most business leaders and politicians, though, so I'm definitely not picking on Lindsey, who does well in these settings.
He cut Zuckerberg off exactly where he should have to avoid getting an answer he didn't want.
quote:
And the Zuck didn't do much to dispell his android image.
He is a robot, and that's why I think what I do.
Posted on 5/4/19 at 11:34 pm to dpd901
quote:
It’s Facebook’s market share that makes them monopolistic
they got there by beating the dog shite out of their competition. i can't think of anything more anti american than punishing those who are good at their jobs.
Posted on 5/4/19 at 11:35 pm to FlexDawg
LG is a twit
Posted on 5/4/19 at 11:53 pm to jcole4lsu
quote:
It’s Facebook’s market share that makes them monopolistic
they got there by beating the dog shite out of their competition. i can't think of anything more anti american than punishing those who are good at their jobs.
Actually, many a business owner and CEO will convey an almost animalistic craving to destroy their competition. And it seems to go beyond just fighting for market share....many arent satisfied unless they do beat the competition into submission even if their own company is highly successful. I only say this because Ive noted it numerous times and it stuck with me.
Posted on 5/5/19 at 12:05 am to GRTiger
quote:
My company does things that many others do, but we are the only company in America that does the specific combination of services we do. That doesn't mean we are a monopoly, and it certainly doesn't mean we lack competition.
Who is Facebook's competition?
Posted on 5/5/19 at 12:08 am to GRTiger
Zuck is an idiot savant.
Posted on 5/5/19 at 12:17 am to FlexDawg
Frankly, I believe Facebook was and is supported by our government in an effort to gain access to and control information.
This post was edited on 5/5/19 at 12:25 am
Posted on 5/5/19 at 12:23 am to RPC4LSU
quote:
Who is Facebook's competition?
Google, Yahoo, Twitter, Snapchat, YouTube, Vimeo, Amazon, cable providers.
Which service are you talking about?
Posted on 5/5/19 at 12:23 am to Blaeke
quote:
Zuck is an idiot savant.
When I watch and hear Zuck talk, he reminds me of Deeds' frostbite foot. He has no soul, just dead inside. I just want to beat the shite out of him.
Posted on 5/5/19 at 12:31 am to Langland
quote:
Frankly, I believe Facebook was and is supported by our government in an effort to gain access to and control information.
I dont think there are many apps and websites that dont farm and trade personal data and information these days.
Posted on 5/5/19 at 12:53 am to FlexDawg
Facebook isn’t really a monopoly, they are framing it wrong if this is the route they try to attack them. The debate should be strictly platform vs publisher.
If Facebook continues to heavily regulate what is fit to be posted on their website and who is allowed to post, we should treat them like a publisher and start holding them to those standards. That’s much better than stepping in and trying to create new regulations, there’s no need to over complicate this.
Nothing is stopping anyone from starting the next Facebook tomorrow, so it’s not a monopoly. The reason everyone uses them is because they made the best product, not because they blocked out all their competitors. The idea of government regulation on the internet in any form is scary even if Facebook is being dumb right now.
If Facebook continues to heavily regulate what is fit to be posted on their website and who is allowed to post, we should treat them like a publisher and start holding them to those standards. That’s much better than stepping in and trying to create new regulations, there’s no need to over complicate this.
Nothing is stopping anyone from starting the next Facebook tomorrow, so it’s not a monopoly. The reason everyone uses them is because they made the best product, not because they blocked out all their competitors. The idea of government regulation on the internet in any form is scary even if Facebook is being dumb right now.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News