Response: The Social Network
Aaron Sorkin’s The Social Network dramatizes Facebook’s origins and the objectionable path that Mark Zuckerberg took to world domination. The Social Network characterizes Zuckerberg in an incredibly negative light, portraying him as the stereotypical genius that’s too smart to know he’s a jerk. In The Social Network, Zuckerberg steals the idea for Facebook from brothers Tyler and Cameron Winklevoss and Divya Narendra, and later pushes former-CFO Eduardo Saverin out of the company after gaining global success, showing little remorse for either of these actions over the course of the film. Throughout the film, Zuckerberg is portrayed as cold, pretentious, vindictive, and socially awkward to fault. After watching this movie, it would be hard for anyone to believe that Mark Zuckerberg isn’t an asshole.
But is it true? I took it upon myself to do a little bit of research into the real story of Facebook’s origins, and what I learned was telling, both about the movie and Zuckerberg. Firstly, it is well documented that Zuckerberg had a girlfriend, his now wife Pricilla Chan, before Facebook was even founded. This is significant because it directly conflicts with what The Social Network’s named as Zuckerberg’s main motivation, which was that he wanted to impress girls, restore his reputation, and get back at an ex that recently dumped him. No where in the movie was it mentioned that Zuckerberg was actually in a relationship; in fact, it is heavily implied that he is not in a relationship. Removing this detail greatly reduces the story’s authenticity, which is important for any piece of media that claims to be “based off true events.” The loss of trust with the audience from such a simple yet pervasive lie is a tall price to pay just to implement a misogynistic undertone to a story.
Another piece of the story that is not entirely accurate is the reason The Social Network gives for the deterioration of Zuckerberg’s relationship with former CFO Eduardo Saverin. In the movie, Saverin’s portrayal is unilaterally positive, showing him as a dedicated and supportive friend despite Zuckerberg’s cold demeanor. The real story isn’t so one sided. The Social Network wants to credit the relationship between Zuckerberg and Sean Parker, a founder of Napster and current Facebook shareholder, as the primary rift between their relationship. In reality, it seems that the decline in their relationship had less to do with outside actors and more to do with Zuckerberg and, more importantly, Saverin’s actions. Saverin disgruntled Zuckerberg by running unauthorized ads on Facebook that advertised for free a personal project, Joboozle, which could have become a potential rival to Facebook. Additionally, Saverin’s shares were not diluted out of jealousy as the movie portrays, but because Saverin was lagging in his vote that was crucial to securing funding for Facebook.
My intention in bringing up these consistencies is not to defend Mark Zuckerberg from the contents of The Social Network. Rather, I highlight these “artistic liberties” to showcase their hypocrisy. One of the greatest criticisms levied against both Facebook and Zuckerberg is that the website allows fake articles steeped with bias circle around the site to potentially impact millions. As fair as that criticism is, The Social Network does the exact same thing by passing off a biased version of events as facts to millions of viewers. The film tries its hardest to characterize Zuckerberg as unfit for the empire he has accidentally created without realizing that it is making the same mistakes in its delivery of the information. Of course, you could argue that biopics are intended to be dramatizations of historical figures and are therefore not required to be 100% accurate, but this argument doesn’t hold up. Facebook has as much of an obligation to be accurate as a biopic does, and both are intended for entertainment purposes over educational ones, so why does Facebook receive the brunt of the criticism while movies such as The Social Network don’t? The answer is simple: Old media feels threatened by the convenience of social media and other, more accessible digital avenues of entertainment, and therefore perpetuates this idea that social media cannot be trusted, despite old media being just as deceitful as our modern entertainment. Movies and television have been distorting and downright lying to us about events for decades, but it is because of modern social media that we are now able to expose when our technology and entertainment lies to us. The Social Network may vilify Mark Zuckerberg, but he is just as greedy and profit-driven as any other CEO of any other entertainment business out there.
To summarize, I felt that The Social Network was entertaining at the expense of accuracy. I would have enjoyed to see something that was focused less on the origins of Facebook and more on the phenomenon that is Facebook. Technology is complicated, wonderful, and scary at times, and the public could use less information about stuck-up billionaires and more information about how to survive in an increasingly digital world. I hope that now, a decade after the release of The Social Network, we can reflect on those points that truly matter, rather than the trivial squabbling of rich geniuses.
