Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

abc.net.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 381 posts

Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

#231

Post by stephen_g »

criddell wrote: post #187
xutopia wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> Zuckerberg has a fiduciary responsibility to optimize shareholder value Is that true? And if it is true, he controls 60% of the voting power because he owns class B shares that get 10 votes each. Do you think he will sue himself if he fails to wring every last dollar out of Meta?

No, the OP is repeating a common misconception. Corporate law sets out a number of fiduciary duties, including to act in the best interest of the shareholders but “maximising shareholder value” is not one of them.

The idea that companies should “maximise shareholder value” is a key ideal of some political/economic ideologies (especially what people describe as ‘neoliberalism’) but it’s not law.

Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

#232

Post by HarHarVeryFunny »

wpietri wrote: post #55

> "it is not Meta's role to police offensiveness" Just to fund, transmit, amplify, protect, and profit from it.

And of course publish it.

Logically we might expect Meta to get into selling narcotics next.

"It is not Meta's role to police drug use"

Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

#233

Post by gosub100 »

rubyfan wrote: post #74

Why anyone still engages with these platforms is totally beyond me. They are bad for your soul, bad for the nation, bad for the world.

I don't use FB or insta , but here are some reasons why people use it:

- Keep in touch with family

- Comfort from having their ideas reinforced

- Organize small events

- Share pictures easily

- not feel lonely

- stay current on world events

All of those have other routes to accomplish the same thing, but I guess they have the "Dropbox effect" of simplifying it so even techno challenged can use it.

Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

#234

Post by singleshot_ »

criddell wrote: post #187
xutopia wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> Zuckerberg has a fiduciary responsibility to optimize shareholder value Is that true? And if it is true, he controls 60% of the voting power because he owns class B shares that get 10 votes each. Do you think he will sue himself if he fails to wring every last dollar out of Meta?

Generally speaking, there are two fiduciary duties of the officer: do not usurp corporate opportunities and do not act without information.

Your second question is not relevant because you do not have to be the majority shareholder to initiate such an action.

Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

#235

Post by singleshot_ »

stephen_g wrote: post #231
criddell wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Zuckerberg has a fiduciary responsibility to optimize shareholder value Is that true? And if it is true, he controls 60% of the voting power because he owns class B shares that get 10 votes each. Do you think he will sue himself if he fails to wring every last dollar out of Meta?

No, the OP is repeating a common misconception. Corporate law sets out a number of fiduciary duties, including to act in the best interest of the shareholders but “maximising shareholder value” is not one of them. The idea that companies should “maximise shareholder value” is a key ideal of some political/economic ideologies (especially what people describe as ‘neoliberalism’) but it’s not law.

I think it's just something that Jack Welch at GE said so many times while making so much money that people started to believe it / wanted it to be true. I'd be happy to hear other stories about why this nonsense arose.

Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

#236

Post by scarab92 »

HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #232
wpietri wrote: post #55

> "it is not Meta's role to police offensiveness" Just to fund, transmit, amplify, protect, and profit from it.

And of course publish it. Logically we might expect Meta to get into selling narcotics next. "It is not Meta's role to police drug use"

[flagged]

Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

#237

Post by rancar2 »

HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #232
wpietri wrote: post #55

> "it is not Meta's role to police offensiveness" Just to fund, transmit, amplify, protect, and profit from it.

And of course publish it. Logically we might expect Meta to get into selling narcotics next. "It is not Meta's role to police drug use"

It runs that global marketplace enabling this kind of trade per their internal 2024 documents quoted in the following article:

https://www.reuters.com/investigations/meta-is-earning-fortu...

“Meta internally projected late last year that it would earn about 10% of its overall annual revenue – or $16 billion – from running advertising for scams and banned goods, internal company documents show.”

Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

#238

Post by rohan_ »

rubyfan wrote: post #74

Why anyone still engages with these platforms is totally beyond me. They are bad for your soul, bad for the nation, bad for the world.

It's not like traditional media is any better. At least with social media platforms the means of producing media and building a following has been democratized.

Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

#239

Post by freejazz »

asdvsadnvs wrote: post #169
phatfish wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zuck was gagging for the Trump 2nd term so he could go all in on this shit. Slow clap for the Meta employees that enable it.

[flagged]

Shame on anyone that works for Meta!

Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

#240

Post by lokar »

scarab92 wrote: post #236
HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And of course publish it. Logically we might expect Meta to get into selling narcotics next. "It is not Meta's role to police drug use"

[flagged]

At least you don’t have to use the default feed. You can make your own.
Post reply on HN