Anyone else watch Mark Zuckerberg: Inside Facebook on BBC2 at the weekend? A hit and miss affair, the programme was presented by Emily Maitlis who charted the rise of Facebook, from humble beginnings to its current position of online behemoth which has worked its way into the lives of 800 million people.
Maitlis had secured a rare interview with Zuckerberg. So far, so good. But there were a couple of snags. Whilst the programme made some interesting points about the cultural impact of Facebook, it was less successful when tackling the man who created it. Over the course of an hour, we were given about five minutes of Zuck being interviewed by Maitlis and saying 'cool' and 'awesome' alot and waffling on about making society more open - the rest of the time she devoted to an origins story, visiting old haunts and interviewing college professors and friends. The origins thing has already been done, with considerable skill and style by The Social Network. The makers acknowledged as much, throwing in a few clips from the movie and trying to pick holes in it, citing various inaccuracies without really backing them up.
Still, it was worth sitting through for a couple of reasons. Firstly, Maitlis finally landed a blow (around the 50 minute mark) when she quizzed Elliot Schrage, Facebook's VP public policy, on the site's 'Like' button. If you click 'Like' on a brand or product, you could be unwittingly promoting it to your friends in their sidebars. Is it right that a person is used to promote a company when they have not agreed to it, she asked. "Let's pause," said Schrage, with a 'why is the nice, attractive lady from the Beeb ambushing me' look on his face. "You're asking a profound question. What's advertising?" He then attempted to fob her off with talk of 'affirmative linking' and 'ranking mechanisms'. Before excusing himself and jumping out the window...OK, I made that last bit up but watch it and you'll see what I mean.
Secondly, is Facebook really a force for good as Zuck would have us believe? Is it, to quote COO, Sheryl Sandberg, "better if we're all more open and connected" when the facilitator is a multi-billion dollar company dogged by criticism of its privacy policy? For all the talk of a revolution in the way we communicate, is the site essentially just a means of escape for people when they're bored and lonely? And, as such, has it become a master of disguise, mercilessly exploiting its users as it morphs from social to commercial network? As one wag put it: "Ask not what Facebook can do for you, ask what you can do for Facebook."
Sadly, the programme left it too late to really get to grips with these questions, but it did at least provide some interesting food for thought. If you missed it, you can watch it here.
Maitlis had secured a rare interview with Zuckerberg. So far, so good. But there were a couple of snags. Whilst the programme made some interesting points about the cultural impact of Facebook, it was less successful when tackling the man who created it. Over the course of an hour, we were given about five minutes of Zuck being interviewed by Maitlis and saying 'cool' and 'awesome' alot and waffling on about making society more open - the rest of the time she devoted to an origins story, visiting old haunts and interviewing college professors and friends. The origins thing has already been done, with considerable skill and style by The Social Network. The makers acknowledged as much, throwing in a few clips from the movie and trying to pick holes in it, citing various inaccuracies without really backing them up.
Still, it was worth sitting through for a couple of reasons. Firstly, Maitlis finally landed a blow (around the 50 minute mark) when she quizzed Elliot Schrage, Facebook's VP public policy, on the site's 'Like' button. If you click 'Like' on a brand or product, you could be unwittingly promoting it to your friends in their sidebars. Is it right that a person is used to promote a company when they have not agreed to it, she asked. "Let's pause," said Schrage, with a 'why is the nice, attractive lady from the Beeb ambushing me' look on his face. "You're asking a profound question. What's advertising?" He then attempted to fob her off with talk of 'affirmative linking' and 'ranking mechanisms'. Before excusing himself and jumping out the window...OK, I made that last bit up but watch it and you'll see what I mean.
Secondly, is Facebook really a force for good as Zuck would have us believe? Is it, to quote COO, Sheryl Sandberg, "better if we're all more open and connected" when the facilitator is a multi-billion dollar company dogged by criticism of its privacy policy? For all the talk of a revolution in the way we communicate, is the site essentially just a means of escape for people when they're bored and lonely? And, as such, has it become a master of disguise, mercilessly exploiting its users as it morphs from social to commercial network? As one wag put it: "Ask not what Facebook can do for you, ask what you can do for Facebook."
Sadly, the programme left it too late to really get to grips with these questions, but it did at least provide some interesting food for thought. If you missed it, you can watch it here.
