Facebook Is a Form of Philanthropy

Buried deep within Facebook's IPO documents, and largely ignored by media who are focused on the wealth that will be created by the IPO, is a startling letter from Mark Zuckerberg. It's a letter that should make the entire corporate world stop and take note, and a letter that marks a major evolution in our modern understanding of philanthropy.

The letter says that Facebook "was built to accomplish a social mission" and goes on to say:

There is a huge need and a huge opportunity to get everyone in the world connected, to give everyone a voice and to help transform society for the future. The scale of the technology and infrastructure that must be built is unprecedented, and we believe this is the most important problem we can focus on.

We hope to strengthen how people relate to each other.

Even if our mission sounds big, it starts small -- with the relationship between two people.

Personal relationships are the fundamental unit of our society. Relationships are how we discover new ideas, understand our world and ultimately derive long-term happiness.

I have never met Mark, I'm not invested in Facebook, I don't work with Facebook and I believe him 100 percent.

But I would argue that Facebook itself is a form of philanthropy.

Almost everyone forgets that "philanthropy" doesn't mean check-writing.

The greek root of the word is philanthropia, (probably from Prometheus Bound) means "the love of humanity." The Romans turned this in to "humanitas."

In the last hundred years or so, we have started to use the word "philanthropy" as shorthand for the transfer of wealth. We seem to think that anything other than that doesn't count.

But I would argue that the platform Facebook has given the world helps people connect with those they love, enjoy their lives, and improve the lives of others more powerfully than any other technology we have seen.

The hundreds of billions of interactions that Facebook facilitates every day help us enjoy those we know and love on a more frequent basis -- no matter where they live.

This is philanthropy. These interactions, and the happiness they produce, is at the core of what it means to be human.

Will the founders and leadership of Facebook become philanthropists in the traditional sense? I have no doubt. But I believe the wealth they donate will have less of an impact than the amazing product they have built.

 

Follow Trevor Neilson on Twitter: www.twitter.com/trevor_neilson

Comments

[rafey]

09:45 AM on 02/06/2012

E-mail accomplishes the same thing without taking advantage of the individual's personal info. Most of the personal info. stolen by Facebook is misinterpreted and misleading since it is created by an algorithm that is incapable of considering the context of the information. I see nothing philanthropic about this type of technobehavior.

[addisonsteele]

06:30 PM on 02/03/2012

Facebook is not a form of philanthropy. Facebook is a giant data-mining operation by which it makes billions selling the private information of those foolish enough to use it.

[garbanzo11]

11:11 AM on 02/03/2012

I really doubt FB is meant to "strengthen how people relate to each other." It only creates a larger barrier in which people do not know how to socialize without the protection of a screen, be it a cell phone or a computer screen. Younger generations are consumed by this idea--creating alter ego's and forgetting what it's like to actually talk to some or fix problems without changing your status to relate to a problem you don't know how to confront.

[beerbagger]

06:42 AM on 02/03/2012

Marketing 101: Value added statement...?

Got nothing against FB b/c it's just a open air Trapper Keeper with lots of rants or bragging with doodles, notes and pics or vids of kids, kittens, and dogs.

[French Toast]

07:22 PM on 02/02/2012

So because he pretends like his profit motive is altruistic (never saw THAT before), you write an article singing his praises?

Hmmm...

[manganaise]

06:26 PM on 02/02/2012

"...accomplish a social mission" ???? lol thanks to the Internet among other FB people are even more isolated and suffers from loneliness and isolation, despite the 400 FB friends. So I would say "hypocrisy" and not philanthropy

[peacekitten]

04:17 PM on 02/02/2012

and yet they seem bound and determined to shut down this aspect of their product. they ENDLESSLY harass those who have found it an invaluable tool to save the lives of pets in shelters who would otherwise have absolutely no chance at all. they shut down pages, and prohibit mutual adding of "friends" for no reason at all and without warning. this all wastes valuable time and COSTS lives that could be spared. they've got a lot of work to do in their priorities department. saving lives should be something they encourage, not make more difficult than it already is.

[Tsvi1]

04:02 PM on 02/02/2012

The invention of the Internet was not philanthropy, and neither the commercialization of the Internet philanthropy. The "straight" definition of philanthropy you use is weak. Its not about writing cheques, its about helping humanity without a direct physical benefit to yourself. Under that, Facebook would definitely not be philanthropy. Because if we use your definition, every communications company deals in "philanthropy" and so does every artist and even the businessmen who promote said "good for humanity" products because they are spreading it. The fact is that they all make money off their business, hence why they support it.

[Trevor Neilson]

04:46 PM on 02/02/2012

I'm curious who ever claimed that philanthropy should be, as you say, "without a direct physical benefit to yourself?" I think you are confusing philanthropy with sacrifice?

[Robert Randell]

03:31 PM on 02/02/2012

A great comment on Facebook and a good reminder of what philanthropy means.

[Greg0658]

03:04 PM on 02/02/2012

Right On and needed right now

[Dianne Jarreau]

02:10 PM on 02/02/2012

Absolutely no comment. Riskier than you might imagine.