Background
Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg has become one of the world’s most recognizable figures over the course of the past few years, but not everyone is a fan. Despite his powerful position, many people have raised concerns about the ethical implications and effects of his widespread influence. These issues have led to questions of whether or not Zuckerberg will like a column, or any opinion piece, that questions his principles and policies.
Data & Expert Perspectives
According to recent surveys, the majority of people believe that Zuckerberg’s vast wealth has enabled him to achieve more than many could dream of, yet more than half of those same respondents express feelings of unease. Data-driven content platform Blink AI found that 51% of millennials think that Zuckerberg’s influence on the world has become a problem, with 70% saying that these actions were guided by financial gain.
Notable experts like Jonathan Zittrain, a Harvard Law School professor, voice opinions that such wealth and power can be detrimental to society. He warns that this kind of influence leads to the “self-worded winners of the Zuckerberg Sweepstakes”. In his comprehensive essay series titled “The Wealth of Networks”, he suggests that increasing levels of concentration of power, alongside erosion of a variety of social and democratic values, can have a negative impact on our lives.
Analysis & Insights
Essentially, influential figures like Zuckerberg can have an enormous effect on our society and culture. Historical evidence reflects the reality that powerful men and women have a lasting impact long after they have left their mark, having had the resources to leave them in places and positions of strength that others without such resources could not.
The power that these individuals possess can also have unexpected repercussions on the very same public that admires them. As Nobel-Prize Laureate and economist Friedrich Hayek reminds us, high concentration of power can lead to dangerous imbalances. Those that possess it may believe that through the implementation of certain policies and plans, they can shift society in the desired direction.
Consequences of Concrentration of Power
The reality is that such manifestations of power can cause possible long-term consequences. Wealth inequality have long been an issue and continues to be, with the top 0.1% of American individuals possessing as much wealth as the bottom 90%. This means that a small number of individuals own a significantly higher proportion of the country’s wealth than the majority.
Although Zuckerberg and those like him often state that their actions are for the benefit of society, it is essential to be aware of the dangers of their immense power and influence. It can often lend itself to the formation of monopolies and oligopolies, which are antithetical to free markets and its supposed principles of competition.
Protection of Liberty & Well-Being
Individuals such as Adam Smith and John Stuart Mill have been integral to the development of capitalism, which is largely based upon the ideas of a free and open market. The market should facilitate the realization of fundamental liberties and the general improvement of well-being. According to Smith, “the welfare of the people is best promoted by an open and free competition”.
This is particularly relevant today as the growing technological advances have enabled previously unimaginable concentrations of power, similar to those that have sparked political revolutions in the past. With regard to Zuckerberg and people in positions of power similar to him, it is important to ensure that everything they do is as much in the benefit of society as it is for themselves.
Differentiate From Competition
The free market system organizes society’s resources in order to produce an efficient and cost-effective allocation of that same resource. At its most basic form, markets will reward those with the best strategies and plans whereas those who cannot differentiate themselves from their competition will be left behind.
For Zuckerberg and his competitors, the ability to create superior products and services is essential to their success. This highlights the importance of innovation and competition for generating better outcomes for society.
Zuckerberg & Changes in Society
Given his privileged position, it would be easy for Zuckerberg to lobby for desired changes. However, the long-term implications of jettisoning a competitive system could have a negative effect on society. The danger of the handful of individuals that control the majority of resources is that they may attempt to control or impede the progress of others.
In these cases, it is essential that concentrations of power are managed responsibly and, as Smith advocates, that everyone is given an “opportunity to acquire property, to employ their faculties and to receive the rewards of their industry”. Otherwise, there exists the great danger of individuals such as Zuckerberg inhibiting the pursuit of economic betterment by the wider public.
Impact of Wealth
It is no surprise that individuals like Zuckerberg have become immensely wealthy, given the power they now possess. These immense fortunes have allowed them to have much greater influence than their predecessors. This immense wealth awards them the opportunity to succeed in many projects they wish to push forward, and potentially cause significant changes in the process.
Of course, this doesn’t necessarily mean that this is a bad thing but it is important to ensure that there are sufficient checks and balances in place. This can help protect society from those who may use their resources and power for the benefit of themselves, instead of for the greater good.
Resource Allocation & Inequality
The fact that Zuckerberg owns an equivalent amount of wealth as the bottom 90% of the US population is troubling, to say the least. It is evidence of the effectively of well-renowned capitalists such as Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller, who each managed to amass a tremendous fortune during the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
While it is important to recognize the benefit of such individuals, it is simultaneously vital to be aware of their misdeeds and flaws, lest they should be repeated. It is deeply worrying that a few individuals have the capacity to benefit or hurt many when the resource of wealth is so heavily concentrated in the hands of few.
