this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2023
88 points (87.3% liked)
Out of the loop
10780 readers
1 users here now
A community that helps people stay up to date with things going on.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Meta’s rebranding at least makes sense. The company has been more than Facebook for a long time, so collecting everything under a different umbrella isn’t too far fetched. Facebook still exists as a product, so they haven’t thrown away all the brand value. Google did kind of the same with Alphabet.
Rebranding Twitter to X doesn’t make sense at all.
But they're not just re-branding. Twitter is now under some kind of corporate shell company. I haven't seen much coverage of that, but my suspicion is that it's intended to act as some kind of insulator to contain Twitter's debts.
Like when they break a company into pieces and put everyone's debts and no assets into a single part and then that part declares bankruptcy and all the debt magically goes away, leaving everything else with lots of assets and no debts and a future that looks really rosy. I can't help but think that this is something similar to that.
Wow, I wish I could split myself up into separate entities to bankrupt part of so that I can get away Scott free. But alas, I'm a real person, not a company with "personhood."
This is one example of how corporate persons are more persony than human persons.
Some animals are more equal than others.
Especially because they bought a bunch of companies that weren't Facebook. Another example is Google rebranding as Alphabet. Those make complete sense.