Last evening, Sunday December 5, 2010, Mark Zuckerberg appeared on the TV program 60 Minutes. The folks at the TV program seem to believe that they were going to receive some priceless inside information from the Facebook founder. But were they fooled in what was being reported and were they the victims of overzealous reporting?
One recent news article states:
Leave it to 60 Minutes to pass off Facebook’s utterly meaningless redesign of the site’s profile pages as some kind of “exclusive” worth leading a segment on the company’s founder, Mark Zuckerberg. It’s not just that correspondent Lesley Stahl didn’t understand what’s meaningful about his story; it’s that Zuckerberg essentially reduced the venerable newsmagazine to an unwitting shill.
When 60 Minutes revisits the same subject twice in less than three years, there should be a pretty clear sense of what merits the return. There was none to be found. Here’s what did register though:
60 Minutes overplayed a purely cosmetic change. The photos are bigger, the placement of different pieces of information shifted around… big whoop. For Stahl to get all breathless and devote several minutes to the changes toward the beginning of the segment conveyed a significance those changes didn’t have. Facebook basically used CBS (NYSE: CBS) as an infomercial for placating the older demographics most likely to have the kind of reflexive resistance that always accompanies any alterations to Facebook visual design.
I do not watch 60 Minutes so I cannot comment on the interview. But in my opinion 60 Minutes is an old person’s show. I would seriously doubt that anyone who watched the program would even understand what Facebook is or does. This makes it easy for someone like Zuckerberg to pull the wool over the eyes of the 60 Minutes staff and reporters.
What do you think?