Republicans have always attracted corporate CEOs – their hands off approach to labor and environmental standards is great for externalizing costs onto society at large and boosting profits. Silicon Valley companies were supposedly the exception. But now Facebook’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg is not just giving a prominent Republican (and likely 2016 presidential candidate) a platform to speak with employees and be associated with a major brand – he’s helping fill the campaign war chest.
Mark Zuckerberg likes Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey. So much that Mr. Zuckerberg, a co-founder of Facebook, and his wife will hold a fund-raiser for him next month at their home in Palo Alto, Calif…
A spokeswoman for Mr. Zuckerberg, who is the company’s chief executive, said he and his wife admired the governor’s work on education policy — Mr. Christie has pushed for vouchers, championed a new state law weakening tenure in public schools, and signed a contract with the teachers union in the state-run Newark schools that will allow performance bonuses. He also signed a law requiring teachers, among other public employees, to pay more toward their pension and benefits.
That “work on education policy” would be privatizing public education for the benefit of private companies, but lets put that aside for a second. The real issue is how far does Mr. Zuckerberg’s support go for Governor Christie. If Christie runs for president will Zuckerberg help the campaign by making Facebook user data available for messaging and get out the vote efforts?
This can not be far from Democratic Party strategists minds as the Democratic Governor’s Association (DGA) almost immediately sent out a petition to demand Zuckerberg distance himself from Christie. The 2012 re-election of Barack Obama heavily relied on a technological advantage over Mitt Romney – with Zuckerberg on board the Christie campaign some of that advantage could be neutralized.
And by the way for those wondering whether Zuckerberg/Facebook has the authority to use user data to help a political campaign – yes, yes they do. Facebook owns the data you put on their site or rather information you put on “your” profile. They can and do sell that information to third parties – in fact that’s how they make money.
So should Zuckerberg continue to be enthralled by Chris Christie and should Christie run in 2016 Mark Zuckerberg could prove an invaluable resource to the national campaign by giving/selling the Christie campaign access to Facebook user data. It could be just the edge Christie needs to win.
Photos by Guillaume Paumier and David Shankbone respectively, released under creative commons.





20 Comments


Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Like attracts like. enuf said
The sheeple salt corporate owned social media with their private info and then are shocked to discover their private info is corporate property. Brain dead, pure and simple.
You may be unintentionally casting a rather wide net.
That’s a lot of dead brains.
Add this to my lengthening list of reasons why I don’t have a Facebook account and have no intention of creating one.
Thanks for this post DSW.
It would be a BIG mistake to take Christie lightly at this point. He is one dangerous operator at 70+% approval in his home state and over 60% nationally an early fav for 2016. He is also very keen on positioning himself as the “everyman” candidate.
Zuckerberg on the other hand….
Yup. And (so far, at least) people seem to like what amounts to the garden-variety schoolyard bully shtick. Two black eyes and a bloody nose would quickly send crying home to his mommy…
Ditto!
Agree.
While it probably did actually provide needed help for the citizens of NJ, I saw Christie’s “embrace” of Obama after Super Storm Sandy as nothing more than a signal that he’s gearing up for 2016… by trying to look all populist-y ‘n stuff… and, at this point, for better or worse, things are looking mighty fine for Christie…. sad to say.
I am not a Christie fan, but I will say that I think there was something that happened to him after Sandy. I think that what we saw on the news was not a tactful politician, but it was what happened when he actually saw the really destruction to his constituents, which happened on his watch.
I think that empathy is something that is missing from our society, and I don’t think that Christie could escape the net of the outright dangerous GOP policy agenda, but that was a moment that I was at least able to see a human reaction to any of the terrible events that seem to litter our news.
He is a very dangerous candidate for 2016, and our country’s need to be entertained, while they allow a US president to elevate the scope of his power to a dangerously delusional king of the world status, makes his Tony Soprano act extremely dangerous…I just hope that he was really as moved as he appeared during the the devastation that Sandy wrought.
I think Christie was probably “concerned” about his constituents, but mainly for *business* reasons. It’s my understanding that the bulk of the devastation happened on the Jersey shore, which is a big money-maker for Jersey, esp in the summer months.
Yeah, maybe he had some gen-you-whine “concern” for constituents’ well-being, but I always felt that Christie was mainly “concerned” for himself… as in: well, well, well, what’s in this disaster… for ME??
They’re all sociopaths, imo. Their ability to truly feel empathy is limited at best. JMHO, of course.
Zuckerberg is a turd.
See below
No one can possibly take Christie lightly.
Nope. One has to apply the “What else could he have said” test.
Facebook is, by its very nature, so obnoxious that it’s impossible to be surprised by this. It’s precisely what one would expect from someone like Mark Zuckerberg.
I have friends who call themselves liberals who admire this union-busting slug.
As a resident of NJ I understand why people like this thug. In NJ leadership is measured on the Tony Soprano (aka Benito Mussolini) scale. NJians like tough guy leaders these days and Christie knows it. That his polices have hurt just about everybody in NJ, but his wealthy pals and backers doesn’t seem to detract from his perceived leadership qualities. This man is extremely dangerous. He’ll definitely be the GOP candidate in 2016, you can bet on it. Any Dem. that runs against this asshole had better be wearing combat boots, because this pig is a wild boar, not a farmyard pig and he loves to get down and dirty. You want to run a high road campaign against Christie and your going to lose. Hillary would be my candidate pick to run against this fascist bully. Billary could definitely give this schoolyard bully a good run for the money. If the D’s can stop the GOP drive to alter the electoral battlefield by tipping the electoral balance with their latest vote rigging scheme then even Chris will have a hard time winning in a straight down and dirty fight with Billary. If they are allowed to get away with their plans to turn major Blue states into proportional representation states, while holding all Red states as winner take all, then Chris will win hands down. He loves to cheat, so don’t expect he’s going to do anything to help stop this policy. I’d even bet he’s the one behind it.
How absolute is that? Is Facebook required to scrub the data so that it is unidentifiable? Are they limited by the expectation of privacy provision that is supposed to keep third parties including the government out of your protected tweets? They are called PRIVACY settings after all.
After Republicans got massively out-geeked this year I figured since they have no desire to do grassroots footwork that their next move would be to try and buy themselves a database somewhere. I figured it would be Google or Amazon though (et tu Zuckerberg?). But if any of the above provisions apply in the least, better for Christie to back away or else find himself in the middle of a digital Watergate.
Also since Facebook just finished fighting in court for a policy of non-disclosure to a user’s employer or potential employer thus would be a most mystifying betrayal.
I’m offended at the fascist nature of the call by the DGA.
This is an undemocratic power control group flexing it’s muscles, and concerned about it’s own power preservation. Compare this to a newspaper endorsing Clinton or Romney.
Was there some secret quid pro quo that took place that we don’t know about? Intelligence money shoved through QINTEL to Zuckerburg, so he can act as a NGO front for info collection for the massive spy database?
Is Zuckerberg a citizen or a tool? Did he enlist and now must keep his political views to himself?
Remember when the call by Droopy Dog and Obama to the Banks and paypal can extra-legally cut off the funding collection source for wikileaks as well as shut off their hosting?
What needs to happen is that cartels have to busted up. The content providers and cable companies (delivery) monopolies need to be busted up. The security state needs to come to an end.
Is it only fascism when the Republicans do it?
Also, Republicans have been closer to Tech and more reliable when it comes to Technology freedom, issues whereas the Democrats who are aligned with Hollywood are behind the IP and SOPA. The Democrats need to get it in the neck and good and maybe they’ll start seeing the distopian reality they are helping to create the rest of us have to live under. They apparently are only concerned when it affects their own butts.
I don’t like the larger implications of this at all. and ‘m not even on facebook. Thank the gods for tin foil. It’s good for more than stoping the golpistan-spy complex from snooping on your thoughts, you can make a faraday cage for your cellphone.