I personally have been off of Facebook for a long time. I am in no way a supporter of that company. But when attacking something becomes popular, and normie thoughts are completely controlled, one should ask, what power decided it is OK and popular to attack Facebook, and why.

I am also partially for it being attacked even if the motives in this instance are corrupt. Sometimes evil is what destroys evil. But it is necessary to be ahead of the curve of what comes next if the second evil prevails, and understand it's nature, and to identify preventing it from winning to make sure it at most stifles a bad actor rather than prevails.

There are two main motives I can see to attacking Facebook. One is to impose regulation on it that will trickle down to all other platforms and lead to control of the internet. The other I can see is an attempted takeover. You can see this in the kinds of arguments being presented. The argument is that there is no ethics oversight for various Facebook projects besides Mark Zuckerberg himself. And that part of the problem is that Zuckerberg owns 55% of the shares and so no one can battle him on it. These are two arguments that point to the same "solution." One is that Facebook is under resourced. The other is that Zuckerberg needs less control. Hinting at the solution of outside investment diluting Zuckerbergs ownership to under 50%.

Here is what I fear in all of this. This could be an effort by Black Rock to take over Facebook. They take over every strategic company that isn't founder owned. Then the vaccine propaganda will really flow.

To break things down, here are our opportunities and risks:

Opportunities:
Decreased facebook usership as a result of scandal and user protest
Opportunities to create facebook alternatives now that there is an increase in diaspora from facebook.

Risks:
Government regulation of social platforms that will make sites like ours less free
Forcing of more outside "ethics" groups shaping content, like ADL, that don't really care about ethics
Black rock gaining control of Facebook.

As you can see, most of the opportunities lie in the attacks only being moderately effective. Public perception of Facebook decaying is a positive. But none of the goals of its attackers are positive.

Our efforts to gain these positive outcomes and avoid these negative ones should be to argue, yes, Facebook is a shitty site. Don't use it. People need some solution to the problem of the day. Often a token solution will do. See masks and corona virus. By providing them that solution they will reduce pressure on the alternative solutions, which are regulation, ADL like groups, and Black Rock ownership.