Opinion
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4 — Thursday, March 29, 2018
Facebook needs help — now
ERIK NESLER | COLUMN
A
s my freshman year
at the University of
Michigan comes to a
close, I have been reflecting
on the racist incidents that
have happened this year: There
were the racial slurs written
on the doors of Black students
at West Quad Residence Hall.
There was the video of the
man
appearing
to
urinate
on the “Black Lives Matter”
written in chalk on the Diag.
More recently, there was a
student who posted a Snapchat
of her and her friend with
blackface
masks
with
the
caption
“#blacklivesmatter.”
There have been numerous
incidents, both on and off
campus, and each time many
people have responded with
outrage and discussions about
the problematic nature of
such actions.
However,
I’ve
noticed
my peers have become less
receptive to such discussions
as the year has progressed.
People don’t really like talking
about the same issues as they
keep reoccurring, and I’ve
found lately people have been
trying to change the topic
when such events are brought
up. I think some students
are resistant to having such
conversations because they’re
tired of discussing the same
issues over and over again.
Moreover, because the winter
semester ends in a month,
many students are gearing up
for finals by studying for tests
and starting to draft essays for
their classes.
I myself feel drained, and
there are admittedly times
when I want to forget about
issues such as shootings and
racism
that
plague
college
campuses.
Actually,
there
are a lot of times when I feel
this way, even when I’m not
drowning in schoolwork or
the news isn’t filled with
stories about tragedies. These
feelings aren’t new, and my
peers and I are not the only
ones who have them.
In “Bad Feminist,” a book
of essays by Roxane Gay, she
discusses how problematic it
is that sometimes things can
be hard to hate. She writes,
“We have all manner of music
glorifying
the
degradation
of women, and damnit, that
music is catchy so I often find
myself singing along as my
very being is diminished.” This
sentence resonated with me
because it reminded me of how
challenging it is to be critical
of things that have problematic
elements to it.
One of my favorite book
series growing up was the
“Little House on the Prairie”
series, yet the entire series
is based on a family of white
pioneers who explore land
stolen from Native Americans.
One of my favorite TV shows
is “Gossip Girl,” which has
no diversity except for Nelly
Yuki,
who
exemplifies
the
studious-loser-with-no-friends
Asian stereotype. There is
also Raina Thorpe and her
father, who appear in time
for Black History Month and
disappear after being the focus
of a few episodes. Should I feel
ashamed for liking a TV show
about a bunch of rich people
who are completely unaware
of their privilege? Probably.
Do I still watch “Gossip Girl”
episodes on Netflix when I’m
bored? Yes.
While enjoying a TV show
or a problematic song may
seem like less serious offense
than
posting
a
Snapchat
mocking Black Lives Matter,
the truth is doing so shows
complicity. I may not have
created such offensive content
myself, but the fact I support
such
media
is,
on
some
level, a representation of my
surrendering to the subjection
of others. When I was a child,
I found joy when reading about
how Laura Ingalls Wilder’s
family built a home on “Indian
territory,” and then continued
moving West without realizing
that their actions were at the
cost of many Native Americans
losing their homes and being
subjected to the control of
white Americans. I myself
reside on land stolen from
Native people.
I want to say it’s enough
for me to be critical of myself
and others, but I can’t speak
for everyone. It’s problematic
to support media that subject
others, and it’s important
to understand we are all in
some capacity being complicit
with
the
subjection
of
marginalized groups. On the
other hand, however, if we
stop supporting or engaging
in some way with media
that’s problematic in any way,
there would be a significantly
smaller amount of media left
to consume. I think this is
a hard line to draw, with no
clear answer as to what’s the
best course of action to take.
I think, at least for me,
all I can do is be critical of
everything and make sure to
speak out when something
is offensive. While this is
an
incredibly
unsettling
conclusion and makes me feel
as if I am not doing enough, I
also know it’s possible to like
or engage with something
without
liking
everything
about it. While I like “Gossip
Girl,” I recognize its faults
and I don’t idolize it. I like
“Little House on the Prairie,”
but I keep in mind as I read
it that the Ingalls’ happiness
is ultimately rooted in Native
American suffering (without
portraying Native Americans
as pitiful victims, of course).
I sleep in my cozy bed in my
dorm building that was built on
stolen land, but I never forget
the land rightfully belongs
to the Native Americans who
originally resided there, not
the University of Michigan.
I never support or condone
outrightly
offensive
acts,
such as writing racial slurs on
doors or mocking Black Lives
Matter. I make sure to make
my opinion known, no matter
how tired or disgruntled I
am, because the fight against
the
subjection
of
others
doesn’t stop just because I
didn’t get a full night’s worth
of sleep. I am also careful
when consuming new media
and make sure the work I
engage with aligns with my
beliefs. To be honest, I don’t
think doing all these things
is enough, and I’m not sure if
acknowledging that nothing
is perfect is enough. However,
while it may not be enough, it’s
a part of the solution and it’s
important to take these steps.
F
acebook
has
been
through
a
tough
year. The company is
under scrutiny for launching
an
app
targeted
toward
children
in
January
and
allowing Russian actors to
meddle in the most recent
U.S.
presidential
election.
The new developments in the
Cambridge Analytica scandal
are only adding fuel to the fire.
On
March
17,
the
Cambridge
Analytica
scandal revealed Facebook’s
negligence when it comes
to
protecting
user
data.
Cambridge
Analytica,
the
London-based
political
consulting firm that worked
with the Donald Trump’s
presidential
campaign,
inappropriately
(and
potentially illegally) obtained
data on 50 million Facebook
users. Though we don’t know
exactly what the firm did
with the data, it was likely
used to influence an election
— suggesting Trump may not
have won the election fairly.
Cambridge
Analytica
obtained this data through a
third-party personality quiz
app developed by a Cambridge
University researcher. When
you take one of those quizzes
provided through a third-
party app, the developer is
able to access not only your
data but the data of all of
your friends as well. Because
270,000
people
took
the
personality quiz developed
by the university researcher,
data was collected on over 50
million people.
To remedy the scandal,
Facebook could decide to
simply prohibit any third-
party apps from collecting
user data. Facebook would
never make such a decision,
however, because its business
model relies on these third-
parties. Facebook generates
revenue because advertisers
are willing to pay for space on
its platform. Advertisers are
willing to pay more when users
are more engaged with the
platform — ideally, advertisers
want users to be addicted.
To encourage addiction,
Facebook
promotes
viral
content
created
by
third-
party apps (like quizzes that
ask,
“Which
‘The
Office’
character
are
you
most
like?”).
These
third-party
apps also add to Facebook’s
revenue stream, as they pay
to be promoted. Facebook
is thus incentivized to keep
these third-party apps happy
— as they are the company’s
customers.
Related to this issue is
Facebook’s
allowance
and
active
promotion
of
fake
news — another form of viral
content
that
sparks
user
interest. News that has an
eye-catching headline (even if
it is from an unreliable source)
is exactly what gets people to
click. The fake news epidemic
that
Facebook,
along
with
other social media platforms,
has perpetuated could have
damaging effects on society. The
editorial board of the Wall Street
Journal wrote, “A few thousand
Russian ads on Facebook didn’t
turn the 2016 election, but the
proliferation of fake news is
tainting public discourse.”
Because over 110 million
Americans get their news
from Facebook, the platform
must take steps to ensure the
accuracy of its content. The
company also needs to ensure
its algorithms are not actively
promoting unreliable content
on its users’ News Feeds.
Facebook needs to realize
its platform — which reaches
over 2 billion users worldwide
— can be dangerous. CEO
Mark
Zuckerberg
has
recently responded to public
scrutiny
by
asserting
the
platform will only promote
publishers whose content is
“trustworthy,
informative
and local.” I hope Zuckerberg
keeps this promise — I hope
users will be more accurately
informed
in
the
coming
months and years.
As
for
protecting
Facebook’s
users’
privacy,
The Economist has called for
the company to take its data
protection protocols to a new
level: “Facebook needs a full,
independent
examination
of its approach to content,
privacy and data … (which)
should be made public.” The
publication’s editors called
for the creation of a “Data
Rights Board” that would
enforce rules and regulations
regarding the use of user data.
Though the regulations
that The Economist are calling
for are intense, I believe that
they are necessary. Facebook
is simply too influential to
turn a blind eye to its negligent
business practices.
Being critical of complicity
KRYSTAL HUR | COLUMN
Emma Chang
Joel Danilewitz
Samantha Goldstein
Elena Hubbell
Emily Huhman
Tara Jayaram
Jeremy Kaplan
Sarah Khan
Lucas Maiman
Magdalena Mihaylova
Ellery Rosenzweig
Jason Rowland
Anu Roy-Chaudhury
Alex Satola
Ali Safawi
Ashley Zhang
Sam Weinberger
DAYTON HARE
Managing Editor
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
tothedaily@michigandaily.com
Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890.
ALEXA ST. JOHN
Editor in Chief
ANU ROY-CHAUDHURY AND
ASHLEY ZHANG
Editorial Page Editors
Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily’s Editorial Board.
All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.
EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS
Krystal Hur can be reached at
kryshur@umich.edu.
Complete the ‘positive business’ funnel
STEPHANIE TRIERWEILER | COLUMN
A
ccording
to
the
University of Michigan’s
Ross School of Business
employment report,
bachelor of business
administration
graduates accepted
full-time positions
in
10
major
industries in 2017.
Close to 40 percent
of
them
entered
the
financial
services
industry
and an additional
20
percent
entered consulting. About 10
percent of masters of business
administration
students’
internships last year included
a social impact component, but
impact was not mentioned for
BBA internships or full-time
positions. Just 1.8 percent of
BBAs entered the non-profit,
education
and
government
sectors combined.
This report, of course, doesn’t
give a complete picture of the
kind of work Business students
and alumni do in their early
careers, but it clues us into the
types of opportunities students
seek
out
immediately
after
graduation and for which they
consider themselves candidates.
It makes sense finance and
consulting would comprise a
substantial percentage of BBA
graduates’ entry-level positions;
jobs in these areas tend to
demand business majors, pay
high starting salaries, are often
prestigious and can act as a launch
pad for a variety of careers.
But unlike many other top
business schools, Ross School
of Business identifies “positive
business” at its core. Its website
proudly states, “At Ross, we
develop
leaders
who
make
a positive difference in the
world. Become one,” and “Be
a force for good. Align your
desire to make an impact with
our positive business focus.”
The school also places its
commitment to sustainability,
social
impact
and
positive
business in line with leadership
development as components of
its central mission.
Why,
then,
is
impact
mentioned
nowhere
in
the
Business
School’s
BBA
employment information? Why
do few alumni explicitly pursue
non-profit work and why aren’t
benefit corporations and social
enterprises
well-represented
among BBA students’ more than
190 hiring companies?
It’s not that the positive
business focus is an empty
campaign. The school offers a
ton of events, classes
and
programs
that
aim to inform students
about using business to
make positive change
and support them in on
campus activities with
impact. For example,
one of the first core
classes in the BBA
program,
Business
Administration
200,
includes
corporate
social responsibility concepts
in its curriculum. The Business
School houses the Center for
Positive Organizations, which
operates
popular
learning
programs like Magnify and
+LAB and hosts the Positive
Links Speaker Series. Its Center
for Social Impact hosts an
annual multidisciplinary Social
Impact Challenge and several
student organizations within
the Business School — like
Net Impact and Community
Consulting
Club
—
create
socially conscious communities
and opportunities for students
to work with local non-profits.
I believe one of the main
reasons many BBA students
engage in positive business
activities like the ones above
but don’t end up pursuing
related job positions in their
early careers is because the
Business School doesn’t frame
these kinds of career tracks as a
standard option.
When
I
went
through
recruiting for internships my
junior year, I remember several
classmates had interviewed with
a dozen or more banks through
the Business School’s on campus
recruiting
system.
But
my
online search for “non-profit”
under recruiting company type
pulled up only a single result.
I
attended
an
information
session for the Center for
Social
Impact’s
internships,
which
outlined
its
Impact
Corps
program
and
grants
opportunities
for
students
who design their own social
enterprise, but opportunities
and
funds
were
extremely
limited for undergraduates.
While
MBA
students
—
who typically work for several
years between undergraduate
and graduate school — have
had
time
to
explore
their
careers and pursue different
job opportunities, I believe
BBAs feel strictly funneled
into
the
major
buckets
of
finance, consulting, marketing
and accounting. And if they
are
interested
in
working
for companies with socially
or
environmentally
driven
missions, they must sacrifice
the Business School’s career
resources and look for jobs
through off campus recruiting.
In an already competitive,
high-stakes
job
search
environment, I feel this lack
of
representation
of
non-
profits, benefit corporations
and
social
enterprises
on
campus drives away students
who would otherwise include
impact-driven jobs in their
recruiting process.
What makes a business
administration
degree
so
compelling — especially in a
broad program where students’
required
classes
cover
a
number of different functions
— is its versatility. Practically
every field needs people with
management, communication
and analysis skills. Though
people might not immediately
think of business majors when
they imagine who pursues
non-profit
or
impact-driven
work,
these
organizations
could benefit immensely from
employing graduates from top
business schools like the Ross
School of Business.
Through
its
positive
business
campaign,
the
Business
School
is
taking
important
steps
toward
developing classes of business
students who have motivation
and accountability in their
workplaces and communities.
But
its
absence
of
non-
profit
and
purpose-driven
organizations in its on campus
recruiting
system
hinders
students
from
including
a
valuable path in their set of
perceived career options.
Stephanie Trierweiler can be
reached at strier@umich.edu.
Erik Nesler can be reached at
egnesler@umich.edu.
STEPHANIE
TRIEREWILER
Just 1.8 percent
of BBAs entered
the non-profit,
education and
government
sections combined.
Facebook is
simply too
influential to turn
a blind eye to its
negligent business
practices.
— Naomi Wadler, 11-year old activist at the March for Our Lives
rally in Washington, D.C.
“
NOTABLE QUOTABLE
I am here today to acknowledge
and represent the African American
girls whose stories don’t make
the front page of every national
newspaper, whose stories don’t lead
on the evening news. ”