You are a Marketing Manager, seeing the Facebook cultural problems can be detriment, you are communicating with the company’s executives

are a Marketing Manager, seeing the Facebook cultural problems can be
detriment, you are communicating with the company’s executives in a
300-400 words memo. Use Inter-Office memo format in MS Word.

State the problem (30 points.) Begin your memo with a statement of the main problem.

Analyze the problem (30 points.) This is where you identify relevant facts from the case and apply a conceptual model
to diagnose the problem. Analyze the problem you identified (and not
some other problem). Organize the facts into a coherent whole as if you
were presenting evidence to persuade a skeptic. Clearly state any
assumptions that you’ve made. Provide evidence from the case to
support your analysis: use quotes, numbers, and facts from the case or
other sources. Analyze the problem using a conceptual model from the
readings or lectures. Apply the conceptual model fully and explicitly.
Cite your sources.

Draw a conclusion and provide specific recommendations for action (30 points.) Provide
the results of your analysis. What are your main conclusions? What
should be done next? Some cases call for a specific decision or specific
actions that need to be taken, while others do not. However, most cases
at least call for an explanation of “what you would have done” in the
situation. Provide specific recommendations that logically follow from your analysis of your problem statement.

Reference Page (5 points)

Certification of own work (5 points)

Guideline – see attached article below or use one from your own research.


Forget Washington. Facebook’s Problems Abroad Are Far More Disturbing.

By KEVIN ROOSE OCT. 29, 2017, New York Times

For months, Facebook’s headquarters in Menlo Park, Calif., has
been in crisis mode, furiously attempting to contain the damage stemming
from its role in last year’s presidential campaign. The company has
mounted an all-out defense campaign ahead of this week’s congressional
hearings on election interference in 2016, hiring three outside
communications firms, taking out full-page newspaper ads, and mobilizing
top executives, including Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg, to beat
back accusations that it failed to prevent Russia from manipulating the
outcome of the election.

No other predicament in Facebook’s 13-year history has generated
this kind of four-alarm response. But while the focus on Russia is
understandable, Facebook has been much less vocal about the abuse of its
services in other parts of the world, where the stakes can be much
higher than an election.

This past week, my colleagues at The Times reported on the ethnic
cleansing of Rohingya Muslims, an ethnic minority in Myanmar that has
been subjected to brutal violence and mass displacement. Violence
against the Rohingya has been fueled, in part, by misinformation and
anti-Rohingya propaganda spread on Facebook, which is used as a primary
news source by many people in the country. Doctored photos and unfounded
rumors have gone viral on Facebook, including many shared by official
government and military accounts.

The information war in Myanmar illuminates a growing problem for
Facebook. The company successfully connected the world to a
constellation of real-time communication and broadcasting tools, then
largely left it to deal with the consequences.

“In a lot of these countries, Facebook is the de facto public
square,” said Cynthia Wong, a senior internet researcher for Human
Rights Watch. “Because of that, it raises really strong questions about
Facebook needing to take on more responsibility for the harms their
platform has contributed to.”

In Myanmar, the rise in anti-Rohingya sentiment coincided with a
huge boom in social media use that was partly attributable to Facebook
itself. In 2016, the company partnered (Links to an external site.)

with MPT, the state-run telecom company, to give subscribers access to
its Free Basics program. Free Basics includes a limited suite of
internet services, including Facebook, that can be used without counting
toward a cellphone data plan. As a result, the number of Facebook users
in Myanmar has skyrocketed to more than 30 million today from 2 million
in 2014.

“We work hard to educate people about our services, highlight
tools to help them protect their accounts and promote digital literacy,”
said Debbie Frost, a Facebook spokeswoman. “To be more effective in
these efforts, we are working with civil society, safety partners, and
governments — an approach we have found to be particularly important and
effective in countries where people are rapidly coming online and
experiencing the internet for the first time through a mobile phone.”

In India, where internet use has also surged in recent years, WhatsApp, the popular Facebook-owned messaging app, has been inundated with rumors, hoaxes and false stories (Links to an external site.).
In May, the Jharkhand region in Eastern India was destabilized by a
viral WhatsApp message that falsely claimed that gangs in the area were
abducting children. The message incited widespread panic and led to a
rash of retaliatory lynchings, in which at least seven people were
beaten to death. A local filmmaker, Vinay Purty, told the Hindustan Times (Links to an external site.)
that many of the local villagers simply believed the abduction myth was real, since it came from WhatsApp.

“Everything shared on the phone is regarded as true,” Mr. Purty said.

In a statement, WhatsApp said, “WhatsApp has made communications
cheaper, easier and more reliable for millions of Indians — with all the
benefits that brings. Though we understand that some people, sadly,
have used WhatsApp to intimidate others and spread misinformation. It’s
why we encourage people to report problematic messages to WhatsApp so
that we can take action.”

Facebook is not directly responsible for violent conflict, of
course, and viral misinformation is hardly unique to its services.
Before social media, there were email hoaxes and urban legends passed
from person to person. But the speed of Facebook’s growth in the
developing world has made it an especially potent force among first-time
internet users, who may not be appropriately skeptical of what they see

The company has made many attempts to educate users about the
dangers of misinformation. In India and Malaysia, it has taken out
newspaper ads with tips for spotting false news. In Myanmar, it has
partnered with local organizations to distribute printed copies of its
community standards, as well as created educational materials to teach
citizens about proper online behavior.

But these efforts, as well-intentioned as they may be, have not
stopped the violence, and Facebook does not appear to have made them a
top priority. The company has no office in Myanmar, and neither Mr.
Zuckerberg nor Ms. Sandberg has made any public statements about the
Rohingya crisis.

Correcting misinformation is a thorny philosophical problem for
Facebook, which imagines itself as a neutral platform that avoids making
editorial decisions. Facebook’s community standards prohibit hate
speech and threats, but many harmful viral posts — such as a WhatsApp
thread in Southern India that spread false rumors about a government
immunization campaign — are neither hateful nor directly threatening,
and they wouldn’t be prohibited under Facebook’s community standards as
long as they came from authentic accounts. Fighting misinformation is
especially difficult on WhatsApp, an app for private messaging, since
there is no public information trail to fact-check.

Facebook has argued that the benefits of providing internet
access to international users will ultimately outweigh the costs. Adam
Mosseri, a Facebook vice president who oversees the News Feed, told a
journalism gathering this month, “In the end, I don’t think we as a
human race will regret the internet.” Mr. Zuckerberg echoed that
sentiment in a 2013 manifesto titled “Is Connectivity a Human Right?,”
in which he said that bringing the world’s population online would be
“one of the most important things we all do in our lifetimes.”

That optimism may be cold comfort to people in places like South
Sudan. Despite being one of the poorest and least-wired countries in the
world, with only around 20 percent of its citizens connected to the
internet, the African nation has become a hotbed of social media
misinformation. As BuzzFeed News has reported, political operatives
inside and outside the country have used Facebook posts to spread rumors
and incite anger between rival factions, fostering violence that
threatens to escalate into a civil war. A United Nations report last
year determined that in South Sudan, “social media has been used by
partisans on all sides, including some senior government officials, to
exaggerate incidents, spread falsehoods and veiled threats, or post
outright messages of incitement.”

These are incredibly complex issues, and it may be impossible for
Facebook — which is, remember, a technology company, not a global
peacekeeping force — to solve them overnight. But as the company’s
response to the Russia crisis has proved, it’s capable of acting swiftly
and powerfully when it feels its interests are threatened.

Information wars in emerging markets may not represent as big a
threat to Facebook’s business as angry lawmakers in Washington. But
people are dying, and communities are tearing themselves apart with the
tools Facebook has built. That should qualify as an even greater
emergency in Menlo Park.

Needs help with similar assignment?

We are available 24x7 to deliver the best services and assignment ready within 3-4 hours? Order a custom-written, plagiarism-free paper

Get Answer Over WhatsApp Order Paper Now