Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.96 AVERAGE
3.96 AVERAGE
informative
reflective
The tea on Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg is piping hot ☕️
Interesting read for me as I works in tech and is familiar with the way big tech works. Growth at all cost indeed.
Looooved the corporate drama hahaha and the sassy tell-all 💅on one of the most powerful people on earth. This is what investigative journalism is for! Checks and balances baby.
I must say it felt a bit biased and offered an unbalanced perspective, and I could sense the whole objective is to expose then-Facebook/now-Meta for all their mishaps. Which, fair enough, serves as a form of balance in the grand scheme of things for how much power they have consolidated. Also, wtf, Meta has 55 billion in cash reserves? That is WILD.
Overall, LOVED THE TEA. Have not been hooked by a non-fiction book for a while. On a more serious note, thankful to glean insights into how Meta has affected society at large. It also serves to warn me about how I can protect me and the people I love from the dangers of Social Media and media illiteracy.
Interesting read for me as I works in tech and is familiar with the way big tech works. Growth at all cost indeed.
Looooved the corporate drama hahaha and the sassy tell-all 💅on one of the most powerful people on earth. This is what investigative journalism is for! Checks and balances baby.
I must say it felt a bit biased and offered an unbalanced perspective, and I could sense the whole objective is to expose then-Facebook/now-Meta for all their mishaps. Which, fair enough, serves as a form of balance in the grand scheme of things for how much power they have consolidated. Also, wtf, Meta has 55 billion in cash reserves? That is WILD.
Overall, LOVED THE TEA. Have not been hooked by a non-fiction book for a while. On a more serious note, thankful to glean insights into how Meta has affected society at large. It also serves to warn me about how I can protect me and the people I love from the dangers of Social Media and media illiteracy.
informative
reflective
tense
medium-paced
My library had this on its "Lucky Day" audiobook shelf, and I decided to give it a listen. Although it is not in the news as often, the controversies surrounding Meta and Zuckerberg continue to be of popular interest. I will say that while this book was well written and researched, nothing in this book surprised me. The book simply outlined the rough edges of what I already knew concerning the issues happening at Facebook, specifically, and Meta at large. I think that the only real piece that I received new insights on was Zuckerberg and Sandberg's relationship.
If you are interested in this topic, this is a great read, particularly if you are new to the topic. However, if you are a little more familiar with the topic, this might not be as scathing and shocking a read as you think.
If you are interested in this topic, this is a great read, particularly if you are new to the topic. However, if you are a little more familiar with the topic, this might not be as scathing and shocking a read as you think.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Bullying, Cursing, Death, Emotional abuse, Misogyny, Racial slurs, Racism, Sexism, Xenophobia, Grief, Gaslighting, Toxic friendship, Alcohol, Sexual harassment, Classism, Pandemic/Epidemic
A scathing look at some of the company’s biggest failures. I agree with the authors. But the tone undermined the reliability of the reporting.
challenging
informative
reflective
tense
medium-paced
The authors aired out all the dirty laundry and laid out the facts thoroughly, but I would’ve liked more editorial voice to come through and shape the narrative. It read like an amalgamation of events and a timeline, rather than a story.
dark
informative
reflective
medium-paced
informative
medium-paced
TL;DR Read this book instead of Careless People.
Longer review:
This is the book that the general public seems to believe Careless People is: an insightful look at FB, its leadership, and all the problems that led to the evil corporation that it has become. But unlike Careless People, this narrative is not built on obvious lies but instead careful reporting from various sources up and down the reporting chain. One of the interesting facts reported is that Meta knows that users engage more frequently and for longer periods of time with negative or outrageous news, instead of carefully, accurately reported news from mainstream media. So, what does it do? It changes the algorithm to amplify the negative stories to keep users coming back, so it can collect all that data and use it for its own purposes and to sell it. I found this funny because that seems how people who hate FB are engaging with Careless People, an outrageous pack of lies making them hungry for more. When this well reported book that came out a few years ago has sold probably 10% the number of books. In other words, users of FB display the same behavior as haters of FB -- opting for ragebait instead of actual reporting.
Additionally, I found the background look at Meta's security team, development team, policy, lobbying, etc. to be a great look into how the company is rotten from top-to-bottom with the few and far between well-intentioned employees being pushed out pretty quickly. I will concede the book is already a little dated as it came out a few years ago, so it cannot focus on all the new bad stuff Meta has done. But that isn't any different than Careless People or any other book which usually is written 1-2 years before release. I'll also point out the narrative structure is a little jumbled and can be hard to follow a throughline, other than "Meta sucks."
But these weaknesses are minor compared to the interesting, balanced, and informed look at the company. If you hate Meta and want a behind the scenes look at the monster that it is, read this book, don't read Careless People. 4.5 stars.
Longer review:
This is the book that the general public seems to believe Careless People is: an insightful look at FB, its leadership, and all the problems that led to the evil corporation that it has become. But unlike Careless People, this narrative is not built on obvious lies but instead careful reporting from various sources up and down the reporting chain. One of the interesting facts reported is that Meta knows that users engage more frequently and for longer periods of time with negative or outrageous news, instead of carefully, accurately reported news from mainstream media. So, what does it do? It changes the algorithm to amplify the negative stories to keep users coming back, so it can collect all that data and use it for its own purposes and to sell it. I found this funny because that seems how people who hate FB are engaging with Careless People, an outrageous pack of lies making them hungry for more. When this well reported book that came out a few years ago has sold probably 10% the number of books. In other words, users of FB display the same behavior as haters of FB -- opting for ragebait instead of actual reporting.
Additionally, I found the background look at Meta's security team, development team, policy, lobbying, etc. to be a great look into how the company is rotten from top-to-bottom with the few and far between well-intentioned employees being pushed out pretty quickly. I will concede the book is already a little dated as it came out a few years ago, so it cannot focus on all the new bad stuff Meta has done. But that isn't any different than Careless People or any other book which usually is written 1-2 years before release. I'll also point out the narrative structure is a little jumbled and can be hard to follow a throughline, other than "Meta sucks."
But these weaknesses are minor compared to the interesting, balanced, and informed look at the company. If you hate Meta and want a behind the scenes look at the monster that it is, read this book, don't read Careless People. 4.5 stars.
dark
informative
medium-paced
Content Warnings
Graphic: Genocide
Minor: Gun violence, Violence, Police brutality, Pandemic/Epidemic
Very detailed account (from the inside view) of some of the controversies involving Facebook's internal policies and how it considered its influence on the dynamics of external events (often driven by use of the Facebook platform to allow efficient dissemination of misinformation or organization of public actions with criminal intent). In-depth discussion of how they were not dealing with Trump's outrageous behavior and exploitation of the platform. The ability of Mark Zukerberg to deflect outrage despite his inactions was fairly remarkable. And yet he is still cultivating his image to be the next Bill Gates in terms of philanthropy. If nothing else, although I won't stop using Facebook, my response would be to use the platform with caution, knowing that everything entered in kept forever and can be searched and shared without my knowledge.