didn’t tobacco companies once refute a causal connection between smoking and lung cancer?
what else is he going to say? that he knows he’s profiting from pouring poisonous sludge into all our lives?
And, even though Big Tobacco was obviously lying, they sewed enough doubt to keep the topic as an issue of debate for decades after we knew it was dangerous.
Zuck is likely doing the same because it works.
Oil companies too. Honestly, the tobacco industries bullshit is pretty foundational to any communications studies.
It’s something we should all keep in mind when whenever we are subject to corporate communications/public relations.
Worse. They had these big, decades-long gaslighting campaigns, selling cigarettes as “good for you” because they “calm” you down, make you look cool and lower your blood pressure, etc.
Even if he was right, his word can’t be taken seriously because of his position. He’s never going to admit his product is actually detrimental.
Tobacco exec: it’s not cancerous
Oil exec: lead additives are safe
Social media exec: no harm to your kids psychology
Sonic Team exec: we won’t make you a furry
Shit, what did I miss?
ditching facebook sure improved my mental health. wasting time is one thing, but wasting it on infuriating bullshit is just fucking stupid
FBM is the only reason it’s still alive.
And events. I use it to follow a bunch of places that have musical events or drinking contests. But I don’t have a single friend, and I only check it once a week or so to see what’s coming up.
Mark Zuckerberg is the stereotypical CEO: lying, ignorant, and indifferent about the wellbeing of humans, as long as it generates profits.
Lol everyone knows there is, even the kids
“Wolf says there’s ‘no causal connection’ between him being there and a declining sheep population.”
True. There’s a pretty direct connection.
That would be what causal means mate.
Not in the English world it doesn’t, mate.
Casually incorrect about causality.
I’m not entirely clear if you are just reading causal as casual or if you’re trying to say that a causal connection can be indirectly related.
Don’t you people have other random things to nitpick to death for no reason?
It’s not really a nitpick if the two words mean entirely different things mate
I don’t even know what you’re talking about anymore. You’re being dumb about a quick joke comment. Go do something.
You confused the word casual and causal, got corrected on your mistake, doubled down anyway, and proceeded to get pulled into a stupid Internet argument about it.
Mark ZuckerbergThe Tobacco Industry says there’s ‘no causal connection’ betweensocial mediaSmoking and teenmentalrespiratory health.There…fixed it.
Yeah because it’s more than a casual connection
Best joke of the day.
The collapse of society and its ensuing extermination of his kind is gonna be cool.
Removed by mod
He’s right, there’s no “casual” connection. In fact, it’s a definite connection.
Causal
