Zuckerberg Feeling Desperate: Facebook Needs a Facelift

It’s not enough that Zuckerberg’s stolen platform is the largest, most powerful social media network on the planet. Now, Facebook wants to control the “metaverse.”

Move over Microsoft; goodbye Zoom, because Facebook is ready to control every virtual meeting in the free world.

Ok, maybe free world isn’t the right word. Because Facebook doesn’t care about freedom. They’ll happily control meeting in any dark corner of the globe. Now, Zuckerberg wants a name that he feels better represents the company and it’s future vision.

This is no longer about chatting it up with your friends. And trust me on this, the only reason Zuckerberg wants to grow his control over the metaverse is that he is desperate to control the narrative. Don’t be surprised if Zuckerberg starts buying up news channels and other media companies. I can see it already: The New York Times, now part of the Mark Zuckerberg Experience. Or how about CNN: The most complicit name in news?

Once Zuckerberg controls the media, he’ll move on to elections.

Picture this: Dominion voting machines replaced by Facebook status bots. Suddenly, dead people from the 18th century will have a social media presence, and very liberal social media presence.

If you think this all sounds TOO far-fetched, just remember, these same people told us Biden got more votes than Obama.

The LA Times chimes in:

There are two things wrong with Facebook’s reported plan for a name change that better reflects its role in the high-tech “metaverse.”

First, the metaverse? Seriously?

Second, who do they think they’re fooling?

It’s still Facebook, for goodness sake, that monstrous, monopolistic company that wants to undermine your privacy at every turn, spread lies and, Big Tobacco-style, hook young people for life on its digital products.

“Consumers are not stupid,” said Jan-Benedict Steenkamp, a marketing professor who specializes in branding at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

By which he means Facebook’s nearly 3 billion users worldwide are well aware of the seemingly endless controversies — the privacy issues, the misinformation, the turning a blind eye to hate speechracism and political dishonesty.

“The only way for Facebook to move beyond its controversies is to radically clean up its act,” Steenkamp told me. “And anyway, even if Facebook does change its corporate name, its main product would still be called Facebook.”

In other words, this is 90% publicity stunt, 10% corporate fluff.

In fact, many experts believe Facebook will follow in Google’s footprints and just create a generic parent company to group together it’s many parts, such as Instagram and WhatsApp.

Tweeters were happy to weigh in on possible names.

 Meanwhile, other guesses say their new company name will be “Horizons.”

LA Times adds:

This is where the buzzy idea of the metaverse enters the picture. The phrase was coined by author Neal Stephenson in his 1992 sci-fi novel “Snow Crash.” Think of it as “cyberspace” — another phrase with sci-fi roots — on steroids.

If the parent company is called Horizon, the company’s various divisions, in turn, could be renamed “Horizon Facebook” or “Horizon Instagram” or variations thereof. Or they could remain unchanged.

And, of course, scandal-prone Facebook’s chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, would no longer be the CEO of Facebook when he’s testifying before disgruntled lawmakers, as seems to be often the case.

He’d be the Horizon CEO, which in theory would insulate the core Facebook brand from whatever missteps he’s been called to account for. Or he’d no longer be the poor sap who has to answer for Facebook. The head of the division would be in the hot seat.

Aside from getting Zuckerberg out of the hot seat, Facebook could also be rebranding in hopes of hooking the younger generation. They don’t want to be “your granny’s platform” anymore. Especially when today’s world values youth above all else.

A new corporate identity, Kahn observed, would have the dual benefits of turning the page on past scandals and repositioning the company in the digital marketplace as a cooler, fresher product.

“They need to get people to think about the brand in a different way,” she said.

We’ve seen this many times before. Perhaps the most prominent example of a company trying to reinvent itself by changing its corporate clothes was when tobacco giant Philip Morris renamed itself Altria Group in 2003.

The company said the switch better reflected its portfolio of businesses. But it wasn’t kidding anyone. The Philip Morris brand had grown toxic after endless tobacco controversies.

The Altria brand, meanwhile, was pristine. So the company called itself that — and kept on selling cigarettes.

Clearly, Facebook feels the need to distance themselves from their reputation, which is tainted as the enemy of free speech and individual’s rights. The company alienated half the country with their war against conservatives. In fact, they kicked Kevin Jackson off their platform nearly a year ago without cause. But conservatives exercise their buying power far more than any other class of people. Leftists tend to overlook that little tidbit of information.

With woke brands like Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben’s using name changes to somehow remain relevant in this leftist climate, it’s no wonder Facebook thinks changing names will somehow erase their sins. The only problem is, Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben didn’t need to rebrand. They just folded too soon when liberals cried foul. However, Facebook has many reasons to disassociate themselves from their brand. And no new name is going to give them a clean slate.



Back to top button