Jack ’n Zuck have attracted much ire from Aus and the couch.
Many people still believe the most powerful person in the world lives at 1 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington DC, but now it’s a handful of stratospherically rich geeks who rule.
One started his multigazillion empire so he and his mates could rate how attractive their varsity colleagues were. Considering his own dubious beauty assets, this was a bit, er, rich, but nothing like the wealth that was to come. And a whole other universe of power.
It is sort of like the school nerd going to a high school reunion in the latest Ferrari, dripping gold, Rolexes and an entourage while the school jock arrives in jeans and driving a skedonk in a cloud of bewildering lost promise.
Luddites, however, are not welcome on the couch: new tech is wonderful. The information now available to all with a hot spot and a smartphone is astounding. Being able to stay home during Covid has no doubt saved millions of lives.
Sacha Baron Cohen, in November 2019, called out the Silicon Six: Mark Zuckerberg (chairman and chief executive of Facebook); Sundar Pichai (chief executive of Google and its parent company Alphabet); Larry Page (stepped down as Alphabet chief executive in December 2019 but still a board member and controlling shareholder); Sergey Brin (quit as Alphabet president in December 2019 but also remained as board member and controlling shareholder); Susan Wojcicki (chief executive at YouTube, a subsidiary of Google) and Jack Dorsey (Twitter chief executive).
He said these six were running the biggest propaganda machine the world has ever seen.
The super six have some ’splaining to do: power, driven by algorithm and riches, is what perturbs the couch.
A few happy, funny or cute moments go viral, and sometimes valuable information, ideas and constructive debate garner some likes or reposts.
But it’s the hate, bigotry, anger, lies, rancid rumour and outrage the algorithms deliver to your feeds because more clicks lead to more money that must push these giants off their beanstalks.
They are not accountable to anyone except more rich people wanting more money. They have zero vested interest in the health or maintenance of a viable society.
They want to keep selling your information to other organisations. They don’t want to fork out for the people who would be needed to properly fact-check and moderate their platforms. And they don’t want to have to pay for the news they use even though they are crippling the very producers of that news.
Democratic governments and blocs have been unwilling or unable to intervene, in spite of a lot of noise from people expressing concern for the very democracy they supposedly represent or defend. Because “free speech”.
Some individuals have paid a high price for their “freedom of speech”, which the Silicon Six vehemently insist is the reason they do not moderate what they publish. Think Penny Sparrow. But others invite hatred with no consequence. Think Julius Malema and his ilk.
Freedom of speech has limits - that’s why we have rules governing hate speech and defamation. Certainly, you’re allowed to be a racist, hate-filled, ignorant, misinformed zealot. Just keep it to your damned self.
- Lindsay Slogrove is the news editor
The Independent on Saturday