Press Rogue — April 25, 2019, 2:00 pm

Too Big to Cover

Finally, after months of speculation, Facebook announced on Wednesday that it is prepared to pay up to $5 billion to the Federal Trade Commission for violating an agreement to protect user data. Wired wrote that such a fine would be “big enough to hurt,” but The Verge was dismissive, arguing that the company is “too rich for it to matter.” Investors, it seems, agreed with the latter view: in after-hours trading on Wednesday, the company’s stock rose some 8 percent. That Facebook can treat a ten-figure fine as a slap on the wrist may explain why, when the Wall Street Journal recapped the five hundred or so articles it had run on the company in the year since Channel 4’s Cambridge Analytica exposé, it noted that this waterfall of content about the firm had “apparently exhausted the interest of investors. While news on data flubs continues to flow readily, Facebook’s stock is up 37% so far this year.”

Facebook may be undergoing “the most contentious period in its history,” as The Verge put it, but the company continues to expand dramatically. Setting aside its half-trillion-dollar market capitalization, the platform has 2.3 billion active users—1.5 billion of whom access it daily. These numbers represent an incredible concentration of power. Yet they have not transformed how Facebook is treated by the press. Most coverage of the company falls into one of two categories: business stories detailing share prices or technology dispatches exploring new features. Political reporting on the company is no better, focusing almost exclusively on founder Mark Zuckerberg or relitigating the 2016 election.

While coverage of Facebook and other tech mammoths remains fractured along decades-old lines, the companies keep growing. To understand that growth, one might first look to the business press. But though the Journal and the Financial Times have been diligent in their reporting on Facebook’s privacy crises, both papers have done little to ensure readers understand why people actually use the service. In a report last month laying out how “Facebook grew too big to handle,” FT charted the company’s explosion in users, but mentioned only the “People You May Know” widget and the “like” button as having driven that growth. Both features are now more than a decade old.

Such oversights would be grounds for mockery over on the tech sites. Not that their close tracking of every new feature is particularly rigorous, as such coverage often includes fawning verbiage that could easily double as advertising copy. After last year’s F8 conference, Facebook’s de facto State of the Union, Wired wrote that the company remained “focused on bringing people together.” When the company introduced a dating service, CNET crooned, “Facebook wants to help people change their relationship status.”

Events with more obvious gravity, like Zuckerberg’s congressional testimony last April, have hardly been treated with more equanimity by technology reporters. Recode reported that Zuckerberg handled himself well, writing, “He was poised, respectful, and didn’t appear to be caught off guard or flustered.” Other outlets were more overtly sympathetic when they mocked lawmakers for their poor comprehension of the platform. Mashable cut together a video of the most embarrassing questions, captioned, “Mark Zuckerberg ended up explaining the internet to a bunch of old (school) senators who were there to grill him about digital privacy but who barely got beyond Facebook’s own FAQ.” Orrin Hatch took a particular beating when he asked, “How do you sustain a business model in which users don’t pay for your service?” “Senator,” Zuckerberg replied with a grin, “we run ads.”

It’s possible Hatch had only been reading the business pages. But the truth is most coverage struggles to communicate Facebook’s full scope. When the Journal reported on a Facebook scheme to cultivate more African users by lassoing the continent with a new data cable, the move was framed as typical corporate expansion, rather than  a geopolitical power grab. Given how embedded Facebook has become across Asia (its growth in the region has outpaced its growth in the United States and Europe by a factor of five since 2016), it’s easy to imagine a future where nearly all of the developing world depends on Facebook for the bulk of its communications infrastructure.

Facebook—like Google, Apple, and Amazon—sits at the center of the modern world. Last August, when Apple became the world’s first trillion-dollar company, the Times produced an infographic that sought to articulate the firm’s scale. “Add Disney to Bank of America,” the headline ran, “and… You’re Halfway There.” Not only does Apple dwarf the entire American media industry and rival the country’s four largest banks, it is worth more than every major automaker in the world combined.

Wall Street may believe Facebook is only half as valuable as Apple, but the nature of its business makes it a global institution; coverage should reflect the unprecedented cultural reach the company has accumulated. To that end, yesterday’s Politico report about how Facebook and other tech giants have managed to dodge EU regulations was a breath of fresh air. The reporter, Nicholas Vinocur, explains that though the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) may be the most restrictive in the world, giving Ireland “lead supervisory authority” over corporations with headquarters in Dublin has effectively defanged the program, as the country hosts enormous Facebook and Google campuses that its economy depends on.

As Vinocur reveals, Irish authorities discovered the loophole Cambridge Analytica exploited in the 2016 election as early as 2011, but their findings were dismissed by higher-ups anxious about remaining in the company’s good graces. Three years later, when an official who had helped squash the earlier report was being replaced, Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg threatened that if they did not find a similarly-minded replacement, the company would be forced to revisit its “investment strategies for the EU market.” She got her wish. Since the GDPR went into effect last year, the Irish agency tasked with enforcing it has received close to two thousand privacy complaints. So far, it has not taken a single action against Facebook, or anyone else.

Rather than getting bogged down in stock prices or nifty features, this Politico report focuses on one thing: power. The company is exposed as a hulking apparatus capable of swatting aside any regulatory gnats that might impede its growth. What would it look like if more outlets took this approach—or better yet, covered tech giants as if they were foreign countries, with dedicated, multidisciplinary teams capable of leveraging expertise in tech, politics, finance, and regulatory minutiae? Imagine if every major publication had a Facebook desk that stretched across several different beats. What else would they find?

Share
Single Page

More from Kyle Paoletta:

Press Rogue May 16, 2019, 4:00 pm

Playing With Fire

Press Rogue May 9, 2019, 4:00 pm

Boys on the Bus

Press Rogue May 2, 2019, 3:41 pm

Correct the Record

Get access to 169 years of
Harper’s for only $23.99

United States Canada

CATEGORIES

THE CURRENT ISSUE

June 2019

Downstream

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Stonewall at Fifty

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Maid’s Story

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Is Poverty Necessary?

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

view Table Content

FEATURED ON HARPERS.ORG

Article
Is Poverty Necessary?·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

In 1989 I published a book about a plutonium-producing nuclear complex in En­gland, on the coast of the Irish Sea. The plant is called Sellafield now. In 1957, when it was the site of the most serious nuclear accident then known to have occurred, the plant was called Windscale. While working on the book, I learned from reports in the British press that in the course of normal functioning it released significant quantities of waste—plutonium and other transuranic elements—into the environment and the adjacent sea. There were reports of high cancer rates. The plant had always been wholly owned by the British government. I believe at some point the government bought it from itself. Privatization was very well thought of at the time, and no buyer could be found for this vast monument to dinosaur modernism.

Back then, I shared the American assumption that such things were dealt with responsibly, or at least rationally, at least in the West outside the United States. Windscale/Sellafield is by no means the anomaly I thought it was then. But the fact that a government entrusted with the well-being of a crowded island would visit this endless, silent disaster on its own people was striking to me, and I spent almost a decade trying to understand it. I learned immediately that the motives were economic. What of all this noxious efflux they did not spill they sold into a global market.

Article
Stonewall at Fifty·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Early in the morning on June 28, 1969, New York police raided the Stonewall Inn at 53 Christopher Street, the city’s most popular gay bar. The police had raided Stonewall frequently since its opening two years before, but the local precinct usually tipped off the management and arrived in the early evening. This time they came unannounced, during peak hours. They swept through the bar, checking I.D.s and arresting anyone wearing attire that was not “appropriate to one’s gender,” carrying out the law of the time. Eyewitness accounts differ on what turned the unruly scene explosive. Whatever the inciting event, patrons and a growing crowd on the street began throwing coins, bottles, and bricks at the police, who were forced to retreat into the bar and call in the riot squad.

Post
The Wrong Side of History·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Left to the tender mercies of the state, a group of veterans and their families continue to reside in a shut-down town

Article
Downstream·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The squat warehouse at Miami’s 5th Street Terminal was nearly obscured by merchandise: used car engines; tangles of coat hangers; bicycles bound together with cellophane; stacks of wheelbarrows; cases of Powerade and bottled water; a bag of sprouting onions atop a secondhand Whirlpool refrigerator; and, above all, mattresses—shrink-wrapped and bare, spotless and streaked with dust, heaped in every corner of the lot—twins, queens, kings. All this and more was bound for Port-de-Paix, a remote city in northwestern Haiti.

When I first arrived at the warehouse on a sunny morning last May, a dozen pickup trucks and U-Hauls were waiting outside, piled high with used furniture. Nearby, rows of vehicles awaiting export were crammed together along a dirt strip separating the street from the shipyard, where a stately blue cargo vessel was being loaded with goods.

Article
What it Means to Be Alive·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

My father decided that he would end his life by throwing himself from the top of the parking garage at the Nashville airport, which he later told me had seemed like the best combination of convenience—that is, he could get there easily and unnoticed—and sufficiency—that is, he was pretty sure it was tall enough to do the job. I never asked him which other venues he considered and rejected before settling on this plan. He probably did not actually use the word “best.” It was Mother’s Day, 2013.

Cost of renting a giant panda from the Chinese government, per day:

$1,500

A recent earthquake in Chile was found to have shifted the city of Concepción ten feet to the west, shortened Earth’s days by 1.26 microseconds, and shifted the planet’s axis by nearly three inches.

Gene Simmons of the band Kiss addressed Department of Defense personnel in the Pentagon Briefing Room.

Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!

HARPER’S FINEST

Happiness Is a Worn Gun

By

“Nowadays, most states let just about anybody who wants a concealed-handgun permit have one; in seventeen states, you don’t even have to be a resident. Nobody knows exactly how many Americans carry guns, because not all states release their numbers, and even if they did, not all permit holders carry all the time. But it’s safe to assume that as many as 6 million Americans are walking around with firearms under their clothes.”

Subscribe Today