Nonprofits’ Facebook Dilemma
If you read the title and immediately clicked, thank you! You helped Momentum Nonprofit Partners outsmart the Facebook algorithm that promotes divisive and polarizing content as a method of encouraging user engagement at the expense of our communities and our country. Now that I’ve gotten your attention, read below…you still may be outraged. If so, please like and share! If not, still like and share! :-)
Corporate giants are having a reckoning, and progressive nonprofits revel in boycotting companies that hurt our communities. For as many nonprofits waiting with bated breath for their next Amazon Smile check, there are just as many nonprofits who have begun to shy away from using the company to purchase goods even though the prices are often more competitive than other retailers. Critics of Amazon point to unfair labor practices, the company’s tax avoidance, and its harm to small businesses as primary reasons for a boycott. The fact that Jeff Bezos chose to go to space instead of using his vast fortune for charitable purposes didn’t help nonprofits grow a newfound admiration. Jeff Bezos could literally end world hunger for at least three years with his personal fortune. He is one of the richest men in the history of the world but not known for being a neo-Warren Buffet when it comes to his philanthropic priorities.
Why are we overlooking Facebook? After the latest bombshell accusations against the company, is it ethical for our nonprofit organizations to use Facebook? Is it hypocritical if we’re boycotting companies like Amazon but still posting all over Facebook?
Over the last few years, Facebook and other social media sites have continuously threatened our democracy, mental health, and physical health. Without question, vaccine hesitancy was exacerbated by social media giants like Facebook, despite the fact that the company claimed to have removed 20 million pieces of COVID-19 misinformation from its platform. How many of you saw at least one post from a friend or family member that claimed that the vaccine contained microchips or that the vaccine made people into human magnets? I saw several on my own news feed, though most of them were eventually removed or tagged by Facebook. I even deleted some of my family members and reported their posts. No, cousin, the United States government did not put microchips in the vaccine. ::sigh::
Even worse is that Facebook lowered its guard on addressing misinformation post-2020 election, which some believe was a factor in causing the January 6th insurrection. Facebook, like many “too big to fail” companies, seems blinded by its own hubris and greed, putting profits before the good of our country and world. Hubris and greed are typically not values that nonprofits accept in our partners, vendors, or stakeholders, so why are we not holding Facebook accountable?
This leaves nonprofits in a tough spot. Ethically, should nonprofits continue to engage the public on platforms like Facebook, which have often been complicit in perpetuating societal problems like election misinformation, increases in eating disorders for young women, and stoking division? Do the positive uses of Facebook or Twitter (#MeToo movement, #Fightfor15, etc.) cancel out the numerous deleterious and insidious methods used to to divide us, undermine our democracy, or make us feel less than? I’m not so sure. Even Facebook’s own staff is aware of the problems the social media site can cause. When Facebook declined to intervene in former President Trump’s dangerous “when the looting starts, the shooting starts” rhetoric last year, Facebook found itself with an outcry from their own employees followed by resignations.
Over the last few years, I’d begun to feel like the use of social media by our organization is a double-edged sword. Former Facebook employee Frances Haugen’s testimony and evidence to support Facebook’s apparent knowledge of its own villainy hasn’t helped. Though nonprofits use Facebook for education, promotion, and advocacy, the company continues to be a threat to our country. In many ways, it’s making things worse for the clients we serve and makes our work that much harder.
Thanks to a provision known as Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, social media companies are free from liability of their users’ posts. This means that they can’t even be sued for their roles in events like the January 6th insurrection or the COVID-19 misinformation campaign. You probably read about Section 230 in the media last year when Trump demanded it be repealed. If there were some legal exposure to companies like Twitter and Facebook when self-taught scientist/game show hostess Jenny McCarthy claims that vaccines causes autism based on a problematic study or a throng of armed militia members storm the Capitol, I guarantee you that we’d see a huge shift quickly. Money is what makes Mark Zuckerberg tick, and money is the only way Mark Zuckerberg will change. Until then, we have to wait to see what Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg will overlook next and what consequences it will have to our country’s psyche, health, connectedness, and democracy. Both Zuckerberg and Sandberg have been accused of knowing the harm Facebook has caused to our country while doing a minimal amount to stop it,
I’m beginning to think that for the good of our country and our world, nonprofits may need to go dark on social media until Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act is repealed and/or Facebook truly commits to substantive change, not just performative, mediocre changes in response to public outcry. Indeed, this conversation feels like a hopeless Catch-22 for nonprofits. Do we get rid of one of our primary methods of educating our community and advocating for our mission until substantive changes are made to Facebook? We could collectively lose millions if not billions if we do, but I believe it would be worth it for the greater good. Yes, I’m realistic about the problems with nonprofits disappearing from social media. Our connections to our supporters and stakeholders would be reduced, meaning we will have one less communication channel to fundraise and advocate. At the end of the day, though, won’t we be better off if we can force change that our Congress can’t (yet) seem to accomplish? With nearly 2 million nonprofits in America, we would have huge power in forcing change by a company that holds our posts hostage in exchange for monetary boosts, overlooks the degradation of individuals’ and communities’ mental and physical well-being, and allows our democracy to be undermined with only the minimum amount of effort in stopping it.
Here’s what irritates me most: There is striking evidence that this post—or any blog post that doesn’t strike the kind of contagious outrage that Facebook wants—will likely be overshadowed by more polarizing content thanks to Facebook’s algorithm, which prioritizes inflammatory material over less agitational content that nonprofits are far more likely to post. The most outrageous part of all of this is that if nonprofits want to reach a bigger audience that may or be not be lost because the Facebook algorithms favor of conspiracy theories, we have to pay for it! Our posts are being intentionally constrained by the same company that will then charge us to correct that problem.
As I write this, I’m painfully aware that if this blog post gains any traction, it will be because of social media. I’m calling out Facebook while also expecting it to be the vehicle to carry this message to you. I feel a little dirty about it. You’ll likely tweet or reshare this on the same platform(s) I’m accusing of being ethically problematic for nonprofits. You’ll likely add your own criticisms of this article’s merit or praise of its boldness, and your nonprofit friends will do the same. Hopefully, you have strong feelings on it either way and are completely triggered by something I have said. Fingers crossed! It will be shared and shared again…and I’ll feel uneasy that you did so because I’m using what I consider to be a corrupt company’s social media platform to encourage you to turn against said company’s social media platform. What a weird world we live in!
To combat this, maybe all of our blog posts from now on should have outrageous titles:
“Momentum advocates for all French bulldogs to be deported!” or “They aren’t French bulldogs anymore! They’re Freedom bulldogs!”
“Momentum accuses President Biden of being an alien lizard person in disguise!”
“Greensward! Greensward! Zoo! Zoo!”
“Momentum gives up its 501(c)3 status to support Kanye 2024!”
“Memphis BBQ pales in comparison to Kansas City BBQ!”
Maybe then our blog posts will outshine your eccentric uncle’s posts about Hunter Biden and Benghazi and Dr. Fauci.
I don’t know that I have an answer to what nonprofits should do, but a Facebook boycott by nonprofits seems warranted and necessary. At minimum, stop giving Facebook and other social media companies your donor’s money to boost posts. If you see the Momentum page go dark, you’ll know why. We’ll keep you posted. (pun intended)
P.S. As I type this, both #DoNotComply and #NoVaccineMandates are trending on Twitter. I see you, too, Twitter.
UPDATE: As of 10/14/2021, Momentum Nonprofit Partners will no longer actively post on Facebook nor will it use any funds to promote posts. Read our statement here.
Kevin Dean, Ed.D.
Kevin is the Chief Executive Officer at Momentum Nonprofit Partners.