Facebook Has a Team That Handles Mark Zuckerberg's Page (cnet.com) 55
theodp writes: Q. How many Facebook employees does it take to produce Mark Zuckerberg's Facebook page? A. More than a dozen! CNET's Ian Sherr offers his take on the news that Facebook has a team that handles Mark Zuckerberg's page: "Ever notice the photos, videos and posts on the profile page for Facebook's CEO are a lot nicer looking or better written than yours? Don't feel bad. Mark Zuckerberg has a team of people who are increasingly managing his public persona, according to a Wednesday report from Bloomberg Businessweek. Not only do they help write speeches and posts, but they also take photographs of his family and his travels, interspersing them with infographics about the company's user growth and sales. There're even people who delete harassing comments and spam for him. A Facebook spokeswoman said the company's service is an easy way for executives to connect with people." Wonder how many people it took to help craft the latest post, in which Zuck fired back at "some misleading stories going around" about "some land" he purchased in Hawaii (which another Zuck post noted also serves as a petting zoo of sorts for his daughter).
who cares (Score:3, Insightful)
just stop giving other people your private data so that they can get rich of it.
Re: (Score:2)
just stop giving other people your private data
Trading. Trading away their private data. People may be trading their information away for a pittance - And they may feel like they're getting services for "free", but they do feel they're getting something out of it. I use FB at home, I use Google whenever I need to search, and I use Win10 at work. I know I'm being "tracked" by all of them. I limit (to the extent that's practical) the amount of information that I share beyond what's actually necessary for the service, but there's enough that I feel I'm get
Trump's twitter (Score:1)
And our president's Twitter is managed by a single 12 year old. Go figure.
(By the way, use @DJTCopier instead- follow Trump without following Trump)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
(By the way, use @DJTCopier instead- follow Trump without following Trump)
What's wrong with following Trump? I installed Twitter and have exactly one person I'm following - I've never tweeted or had a desire to. It's a means of seeing what our president (in hours!) is announcing to the world and I don't mind if it's visible that I'm watching. I don't see why any American wouldn't be following him - More policy announcements come out over Twitter than over news conferences with this leader.
I follow him as a concerned citizen. Whether I'm a supporter or not is none of his business.
Re: (Score:1)
Trump seems to see his number of followers as a measure of support.
What Trump "seems to see" and what "is" seem to differ quite often. I've heard him brag about how many followers he has, but I think he's being selectively blind. He obviously reads at least some of the responses to his Tweets - He's re-Tweeted a few of his favorites. From what I've seen in the responses, there's a pretty healthy mix between fervent supporters and vicious critics. Mostly it's petty sniping back and forth (like here sometimes!), but it's inescapably obvious that many of his followers are not
How is this news? (Score:5, Funny)
Wait, so there are people who are surprised that public figures and celebrities don't usually personally run their Facebook and Twitter accounts?
Re: How is this news? (Score:1)
Come on man, these millennials need a constant flow of things to be outraged about.
Why are you such a bully, this is a safe space.
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't seem unreasonable for a corporation or the head of a major corporation to have staff helping them with managing their personal & corporate image. Assuming that the dozen people do other things in addition to facebook posts, it seems pretty reasonable. Posting might might need to be cleared by legal and (shockingly) even proofread for typos.
In other surprising news, politicians and executives don't write all their own speeches and have staff to pick up their laundry.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. A rich asshole has handlers, film at 11?
(for the record, no facebook account - never had one, never will)
in short - Mark Zuckerberg is not using Facebook (Score:1)
Mark Zuckerberg is not using Facebook? I guess he knows what a shit show it really is. And let me say that once more: Mark Zuckerberg, zuck off!
Acess? (Score:2)
Re:Acess? (Score:4, Funny)
His security? Are you implying that he's using Facebook?
Dude, that guy may be much, but he's not THAT dumb.
Twelve people's security. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I would bet for his account it's a system of dual control approval for changes to the page. Something I would imagine they'd probably want to offer to big names who for image management. It would be the smart way of doing it.
Twelve people doing it just means it wouldn't be that hard to have two of the twelve around the office....
Um, yes? (Score:2)
Even Zuckerberg... (Score:1)
is smart enough to not use Facebook.
"Quiet title action" (Score:5, Interesting)
The previous story about Zuckerberg's lawsuit caused me to do a little research. I have never thought much of the man, but there's really nothing wrong with the court action he's taken in Hawaii. What he's doing is a an "action to quiet title". Basically, he has already purchased the plots of land in question, from the majority owners. The problem is that the title to this land is unclear, because there are also many minority owners, most of whom really have no idea they own anything.
An action to quiet title is a court proceeding used to deal with such fuzzy ownership situations, to clarify them so that clear and unambiguous ownership can be established. It involves a process to find and identify owners so they can be negotiated with, or in the event they can't be found to legally remove their ownership to clear up the title. That last bit is unfortunate, but there's really no other way in cases where the ownership in question goes back many generations and has never been documented. The alternative is to leave the legal ownership of the property in limbo. I guess Zuck could do that, but if I were in his shoes I wouldn't want that... and I know because I am more or less in his shoes.
My wife inherited some property from her father. We have a "quit claim" deed that legally transfers the property to us, and my father-in-law had a quit claim deed from the previous owner, and so on back several steps. In our case, all of this was documented and recorded with the county (which is *not* the case with Zuckerberg's land -- so we have a much better position). Our problem is twofold: First, quit claim deeds are not warranty deeds, which means that while they're legal, they are only evidence of ownership, not a guarantee of ownership. Second, the legal description of the property boundaries was changed a few decades ago, and it's not completely clear if the new description actually matches the old one.
In our case, odds are very good that a title company can simply research the past sequence of titles, verify that everything is good, and issue us a warranty deed which guarantees our ownership. BUT there is a possibility that the research may find that there is additional cloudiness in the ownership, in which case we'll have to file an action to quiet title to flush out any other claims to the land and, if they can't be found within a certain time period (a year, I think?), to get a court ruling that we unambiguously hold title to the land.
This is a pretty common thing, and it's really not at all abusive.
Re: (Score:2)
If I own something and then you sue me to force me to sell it then that is abusive.
True. However, that has nothing whatsoever to do with actions to quiet title. That does happen in eminent domain actions, but that's something entlrely different.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't know. I saw the 2010 documentary about Zuckerberg, and he really came across as a bit of a dick.
Having said that, at least he didn't come across all fruit-loops and unicorns like that 2015 documentary about the internship at Google.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know. I saw the 2010 documentary about Zuckerberg, and he really came across as a bit of a dick.
I never said he wasn't.
Re: (Score:3)
??? Why, as a Google minion, would you post this if it doesn't get you anyone's personal information???
Mu.
Re: (Score:2)
Get the fuck out, then.
Connecting with people (Score:3)
"A Facebook spokeswoman said the company's service is an easy way for executives to connect with people."
Having your staff post on Facebook for you doesn't technically meet the definition of connecting with people.
Team or Cordon? (Score:2)
Why is he doing it the HARD way? (Score:2)
A team just to prepare photos and tidbits and press sound bytes?
He could have just taken a tip from a near-famous celebrity:
Hire a stunt double.
Walk and talk like him, dress like him, pose in family photos, take exotic trips, kiss the current arm accessory, prep bogus "leaked" sex tapes, deny everything, watch stock value rise, etc.
Shocking! (Score:1)
i hope he died of aids (Score:1)
if you want to sell cocaine, you must not use it.