I'd love to hear from anyone involved in the hiring process at their organization.
Sure, social media has created new issues. Let's say you don't buy into "the doing something for the first time in history and not getting it right all the time" narrative and you take a "this is all deliberate" bent.
1. Oil and coal companies literally kill thousands of people every year and destroy the planet we need to live. Indisputable evidence of coverups etc.
2. News Corp deliberately spreads misinformation for Murdoch (a large part of Facebook's claimed evil is that they spread news corp)
3. Name a war crime without a major government feeding arms to both sides. In how many of these cases is it your government?
Seems like people don't like getting fed a real reflection of the people, corporations and society around them, more than the crimes against humanity (often literally) themselves.
Facebook's net effect on society is very complex and any employer who would throw out your CV for having worked in a competitive, controversial and (probably) challenging work environment isn't worth caring about anyway. Let it come up and speak honestly.
Most people don't much care, and even among those, unless you're a decisionmaker with questionable record, I wouldn't worry.
I've also never before heard that rank and file Enron or AA employees suffered such reputational damage.
It depends on what you did at FB. If you were simply a programmer or techie, working on DBs or frontend development, or whatever, it's completely okay. It's completely okay if you were in a management position overlooking technical stuff like this too.
If you were a techie who worked on features that are questionable (eg, tracking users accross sites, shadow profiles, collecting data without consent, etc), I will possibly still hire you, but I will ask you how you felt working on those features.
Simply because I would not feel comfortable with someone working in my company who had no doubts and was completely willing to work on stuff like that. Personal preference. Ethics and morals are important to me.
If you were in a management position, and were in charge of unethical features and privacy-invading practices such as the ones mentioned above, I would not hire you.
Disclaimer: ex-Facebook myself, but I'm out of the game now so I don't really have a stake any more.
User growth continues to be strong. Ad business is unchanged even with the boycott. Investor and institutional dollars still flowing in (you can’t just blame Robinhood investors here)
Where is this acting like Enron materially?
I've already interviewed someone who worked at FB and it was definitely a subject I would touch on in the process - their thoughts on working there, why they joined and left/were leaving, etc.
Their product is destructive but their engineering is great. If I were hiring an ethicist, on the other hand...
Mostly because people are in so much demand, and the average IC really does not have the ability to change the organization.
edit: to the people downvoting me, I can tell you for certain that having facebook on your resume as a software engineer gets you interviews