Mark Zuckerberg has an image problem. A new film paints him as a villain, critics are clearing their throats, and Meta has responded the only way a modern corporation knows how: by carrying on exactly as before, looking thoroughly unbothered.
Consider the logic. If the man at the top is the villain, then the company must be the hero, quietly holding up the economy while the public is busy booing its founder. Nobody has yet explained who hands out the medals, but the plot is clear enough. A reputation for ruthlessness has become a kind of brand loyalty. Advertisers have long understood that the public forgets quickly and keeps scrolling, and they are not about to argue with a formula that works.
The film’s makers presumably expected a reckoning. Instead, they got a cultural conversation that somehow ended with everyone mildly impressed by the villain’s wardrobe. Somewhere, a boardroom is quietly deciding that bad press is just weather, and that weather has never stopped a good quarterly report.
Critics say this proves something is broken. Meta’s defenders say it proves nothing except that the numbers are fine, thank you very much. Both sides are probably right, which is the most villainous outcome of all.