The first indication of Mark Zuckerberg’s capitulation to the MAGA movement came when he went to Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort for Thanksgiving in December.
Following which Meta, worth $1.5tn, made a decidedly modest $1m contribution to president-elect Trump’s inaugural fund.
But it seems geeks bearing gifts wouldn’t be enough to placate a president-elect who once threatened to jail the man he called “Zuckerschmuck,” whom he accused of conspiring against him in the 2020 election.
Trump news conference – as it happened:
President-elect calls for huge increase in NATO defence spending
And Meta’s latest move to shift content moderation on its platforms – Facebook, Instagram and Threads – away from third-party fact-checking, might not be its final move to build bridges with the incoming administration.
Why the change of tune? The obvious answer is that Mark Zuckerberg is, first and foremost, a businessman.
The days of big tech companies effectively doing what they like without political interference are coming to an end.
This year Meta faces an antitrust trial and there are moves to revise legislation that effectively protects social media firms from liability for the content they publish.
They, and Silicon Valley’s other tech titans, will need all the friends they can get in Washington.
Little wonder Amazon and Open AI also sent the president-elect $1m each in December.
But there may be a personal aspect to it as well.
Mark Zuckerberg and Donald Trump. Pics: AP/Reuters
Well before Mr Trump’s victory, Mark Zuckerberg had already ditched the grey hoodie for a gold chain and designer clothes.
He and his wife Dr Priscilla Chan, whose philanthropic organisations initially worked to support undocumented migrants, improve access to healthcare and reduce incarceration rates, have since reined in nearly all such activities that could be interpreted as politically partisan.
Either exhausted by or disillusioned with US politics, or – critics might say, rich enough not to care – Mr Zuckerberg was already sitting on the fence.
Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan have reduced philanthropic projects that could be interpreted as politically partisan. File pic: AP
Changing its plans for content moderation in the US may help Meta’s fortunes there, but it could have the opposite effect in Europe.
The EU Digital Services Act requires companies to do more to combat disinformation and harmful content.
Read more from Sky News:
Trump asks court to dismiss sentence
Trump’s victory certified by Kamala Harris
Husband’s death an ‘unimaginable tragedy’ – Plaza
Meta is already facing multiple investigations in the EU and the UK’s Online Safety Act has similar provisions as well.
This explains why Meta is only ending third-party fact-checking on its content in the US, not elsewhere.
A fact that underscores, perhaps more than anything, Mr Zuckerberg’s shift from his once lofty ideals to pragmatism and the threat even companies as powerful as Meta see from the incoming president.
