Aaron Sorkin: An Open Letter to Mark Zuckerberg
In 2010, I wrote “The Social Network” and I know you wish I hadn’t. You protested that the film was inaccurate and that Hollywood didn’t understand that some people build things just for the sake of building them. （We do understand that — we do it every day.）
2010年，我写了《社交网络》（The Social Network）的剧本，我知道你希望我没有这么做。你抗议说这部电影不准确，好莱坞不明白有些人创建什么东西只是为了创建本身。（我们确实明白这一点——我们每天都在做这样的事情。）
I didn’t push back on your public accusation that the movie was a lie because I’d had my say in the theaters, but you and I both know that the screenplay was vetted to within an inch of its life by a team of studio lawyers with one client and one goal: Don’t get sued by Mark Zuckerberg.
It was hard not to feel the irony while I was reading excerpts from your recent speech at Georgetown University, in which you defended — on free speech grounds — Facebook’s practice of posting demonstrably false ads from political candidates. I admire your deep belief in free speech. I get a lot of use out of the First Amendment. Most important, it’s a bedrock of our democracy and it needs to be kept strong.
But this can’t possibly be the outcome you and I want, to have crazy lies pumped into the water supply that corrupt the most important decisions we make together. Lies that have a very real and incredibly dangerous effect on our elections and our lives and our children’s lives.
Don’t say Larry Flynt. Not even Larry Flynt would say Larry Flynt. This isn’t the same as pornography, which people don’t rely upon for information. Last year, over 40 percent of Americans said they got news from Facebook. Of course the problem could be solved by those people going to a different news source, or you could decide to make Facebook a reliable source of public information.
The tagline on the artwork for “The Social Network” read, in 2010, “You don’t get to 500 million friends without making a few enemies.” That number sounds quaint just nine years later because one-third of the planet uses your website now.
And right now, on your website, is an ad claiming that Joe Biden gave the Ukrainian attorney general a billion dollars not to investigate his son. Every square inch of that is a lie and it’s under your logo. That’s not defending free speech, Mark, that’s assaulting truth.
You and I want speech protections to make sure no one gets imprisoned or killed for saying or writing something unpopular, not to ensure that lies have unfettered access to the American electorate.
Even after the screenplay for “The Social Network” satisfied the standards of Sony’s legal department, we sent the script — as promised over a handshake — to a group of senior lieutenants at your company and invited them to give notes. （I was asked if I would change the name of Harvard University to something else and if Facebook had to be called Facebook.）
After we’d shot the movie, we arranged a private screening of an early cut for your chief operating officer, Sheryl Sandberg. Ms. Sandberg stood up in the middle of the screening, turned to the producers who were standing in the back of the room, and said, “How can you do this to a kid?” （You were 26 years old at the time, but all right, I get it.）
I hope your C.O.O. walks into your office, leans in （as she suggested we do in her best selling book）, and says, “How can we do this to tens of millions of kids? Are we really going to run an ad that claims Kamala Harris ran dog fights out of the basement of a pizza place while Elizabeth Warren destroyed evidence that climate change is a hoax and the deep state sold meth to Rashida Tlaib and Colin Kaepernick?”
我希望你的首席运营官走进你的办公室，上前一步（就像她的畅销书里建议的那样），对你说，“我们怎么能这样对待数千万的孩子们？我们真要刊登声称卡玛拉·哈里斯（Kamala Harris）在一家披萨店的地下室经营斗狗赛、伊丽莎白·沃伦（Elizabeth Warren）销毁了气候变化是一场骗局的证据、深层政府把冰毒卖给拉什达·特莱布（Rashida Tlaib）和科林·凯珀尼克（Colin Kaepernick）的广告吗？”
The law hasn’t been written yet — yet — that holds carriers of user-generated internet content responsible for the user-generated content they carry, just like movie studios, television networks and book, magazine and newspaper publishers. Ask Peter Thiel, who funded a series of lawsuits against Gawker, including an invasion of privacy suit that bankrupted the site and forced it to close down. （You should have Mr. Thiel’s number in your phone because he was an early investor in Facebook.）
Most people don’t have the resources to employ a battalion of fact checkers. Nonetheless, while you were testifying before a congressional committee two weeks ago, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez asked you the following: “Do you see a potential problem here with a complete lack of fact-checking on political advertisements?” Then, when she pushed you further, asking you if Facebook would or would not take down lies, you answered, “Congresswoman, in most cases, in a democracy, I believe people should be able to see for themselves what politicians they may or may not vote for are saying and judge their character for themselves.”
大多数人没有足够的资源来雇佣大量的事实核查人员。然而，当你两周前在国会的一个委员会作证时，众议员亚历山德里亚·奥卡西奥-科尔特兹（Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez）问你，“你是否发现了一个潜在问题，即政治广告完全缺乏事实核查？”然后又进一步问你， Facebook会不会删去谎言，你回答说，“国会议员，在一个民主国家，大多数情况下，我相信人们应该有能力自己看清他们可能为之投票或不为之投票的政治人士都说了些什么，并且自行判断这些人的品性。”
Now you tell me. If I’d known you felt that way, I’d have had the Winklevoss twins invent Facebook.