One of the world’s biggest tech giants Meta took another step in its newest effort to better involve themselves with world leaders by endorsing Nick Clegg who is the current vice president for Global Affairs and Communications and a former Member of UK’s Parliament. This step was taken to avoid any potential legal charges and restrictive regulations that might come their way.
Meta is one of the leading tech giants of the present tech world. Meta was formerly known as Facebook Inc. and owns Instagram, WhatsApp, Messenger and Giphy to name a few.
This step will allow Clegg to handle the overall reach and the communications of the company. This gives him the responsibility and the flexibility to shape the outreach of Meta. Nick has managed some of the most complex issues of the company like content policy, elections, the institution of the Oversight Board, and more. The CEO of Meta said that Nick will be leading the company now on all the matters of policy governmental decisions and their interaction with the government as they decide for new policies and regulations to be implemented. He will also be overseeing the public cases of Meta’s new products and their work.
Clegg has been on the front line whenever Meta got into deep waters by being the man to explain their situation. Clegg is famous for his blogs which challenge the narrative on many things that can prove to be helpful for the company. Even though having such a high profile politician albeit former as their communication department leader there are also some places where eyebrows are raised on Meta’s future plans as it extends its reach into politics as a part of its PR program.
There are doubts about Clegg’s taking up this position as the PR motives of a politician and one company are very different. A politician seeks to exploit the negative points of the opposition and weaken their points while emphasizing on their own positive points and stances which generally happen in a biased way. This is not an essentially good thing for Meta as this could lead to them giving a lower profile their negative points and results from surveys. In Meta’s case they are operating one of the world’s biggest systems that can potentially lead to seismic shifts in the political landscape, while being something that can spread misinformation and other things on a huge scale.
Should Meta be redirecting instead of taking a deeper look into the matter? Should they address these problems rather than avoiding them? This question is one of great importance because people have already started to question the negative effects and the causes of online harassment and abuse in this vast digital space.
The impact of this is yet to be decided but Clegg’s promotion of this post can be a good thing as well as a bad one. That only time will decide.
Read next: Meta Just Unofficially Admitted to Tracking Logged Out Users, Pays $90 Million Settlement in Court
Meta is one of the leading tech giants of the present tech world. Meta was formerly known as Facebook Inc. and owns Instagram, WhatsApp, Messenger and Giphy to name a few.
This step will allow Clegg to handle the overall reach and the communications of the company. This gives him the responsibility and the flexibility to shape the outreach of Meta. Nick has managed some of the most complex issues of the company like content policy, elections, the institution of the Oversight Board, and more. The CEO of Meta said that Nick will be leading the company now on all the matters of policy governmental decisions and their interaction with the government as they decide for new policies and regulations to be implemented. He will also be overseeing the public cases of Meta’s new products and their work.
Clegg has been on the front line whenever Meta got into deep waters by being the man to explain their situation. Clegg is famous for his blogs which challenge the narrative on many things that can prove to be helpful for the company. Even though having such a high profile politician albeit former as their communication department leader there are also some places where eyebrows are raised on Meta’s future plans as it extends its reach into politics as a part of its PR program.
There are doubts about Clegg’s taking up this position as the PR motives of a politician and one company are very different. A politician seeks to exploit the negative points of the opposition and weaken their points while emphasizing on their own positive points and stances which generally happen in a biased way. This is not an essentially good thing for Meta as this could lead to them giving a lower profile their negative points and results from surveys. In Meta’s case they are operating one of the world’s biggest systems that can potentially lead to seismic shifts in the political landscape, while being something that can spread misinformation and other things on a huge scale.
Should Meta be redirecting instead of taking a deeper look into the matter? Should they address these problems rather than avoiding them? This question is one of great importance because people have already started to question the negative effects and the causes of online harassment and abuse in this vast digital space.
The impact of this is yet to be decided but Clegg’s promotion of this post can be a good thing as well as a bad one. That only time will decide.
Read next: Meta Just Unofficially Admitted to Tracking Logged Out Users, Pays $90 Million Settlement in Court