An interesting question raised by Izabella Kaminska inan interestingFinancial Times piece.
The last time chief executive Mark Zuckerberg put profits ahead of principles he was accused of facilitating Russian intervention in US elections. Bowing to boycotters — many of which are multinationals or, as in the case of Unilever, domiciled abroad — could qualify as a form of political intervention or silencing.
Unilever is a British-Dutch company. Its headquarters is in the UK.
Its participation in the Facebook boycott, which is leveraged at censoring conservatives and, in particular, President Trump, is indeed a fairly blatant case of election interference, conspiring to prevent a political candidate and his supporters, from having a forum.
And not just any forum, but the largest forum around.
What is particularly damningis thatUnilever’s boycott statement specifically mentioned the election.
Through this framework, we are actively engaging with all digital platforms to make…
View original post 245 more words