zlacker

>>senkor+(OP)
> Of course, here it is ten years later, and the guy in charge just sent it back fifty years. Way to upstage me, dude.

I feel like there's a link to a story missing there

>>wodeno+RG4
It's about the company's recent course change, which includes Zuckerberg's Joe Rogan interview from last week. IMO this has a lot to do with the younger generations. Gen Z were heavily supporting Trump in the recent election, and Zuck has probably realised that he needs to align Meta with them if they want to remain a relevant player in the social media space.

>>this_u+SH6
> Gen Z were heavily supporting Trump in the recent election

What on earth are you talking about? 18-29 year olds were the most Democratic age group, as usual. 18-29 year old men might have slightly favored Trump, but to a significantly lower degree than older men.

>>cipher+Si7
Gen Z only voted democrat by a 4% margin which is an absolute death sentence for the democrat party considering people only vote further right as they get older. For context Obama won that demographic by 20% in 2012, and won it by even more in 2008. If those numbers hold democrats have no path to winning national elections

https://apnews.com/article/election-harris-trump-women-latin...

>>ren_en+au7
> Gen Z only voted democrat by a 4% margin

Yes, which is not remotely the same claim as

> Gen Z were heavily supporting Trump in the recent election [and therefore Zuckerberg needed to change political course for his social media to stay relevant]

which is the false claim I was responding to.

> If those numbers hold democrats have no path to winning national elections

Yes, it's certainly the case that if Democrats keep getting the same percentage of votes as in elections they lost badly, they'll keep losing elections.