Yikes. So much to say.

> Google may be more powerful and invasive even, but there's tons of reasons they have a less-manipulative, less-awful business model overall.

They sell ads too. Sure, they don't have THE newsfeed, but they're still trying. Google Now is a feed with personal and non-personal content they're trying to sneak into your life. They're still trying to make their way into your feelings and social network with Google photos, their Clips camera, etc.

Google invented the "shadow profile": they were there, checking which website's you visited before Facebook was even a thing. They're even doing it without cookies now [1].

Google is the company Facebook has been trying to become. They're very colorful, they have those cute doodles, Android is "open"; they're an older company that's been smarter at PR. Part of that has been not making huge waves, keeping all data closed (as opposed to Facebook, which has an open platform), and keeping quiet.

> Any successful attack on Facebook is a good thing.

Facebook isn't going anywhere, and if it does, who will step in to cover the social networking space? I can assure you Google will be the first in line. You'll have a single company with full information about you. Then what?

> I'd say Facebook < Google = Amazon < Microsoft < Apple < FLO (free/libre/open).

I know it's perhaps a bit much to ask, but would you care to elaborate with why your raking is as it is?

These rankings are so often just personal hunches based on what has been on the headlines lately and it leads to sentiments like this.

I'm not trying to defend Facebook, but rankings without factual evidence make little sense. Of course Facebook will be at the bottom, cause the media and Facebook have always been at odds [2]. Media is a big business with interests too, and Facebook is one of, if not its biggest threats.

Apple and Google collect more location and app-usage data than Facebook. Apple had big controversies about suicides in its manufacturing plants: latest was this year [3]. Amazon workers are treated like cattle [5] and even have to pee on bottles to save time [4].

Why is Microsoft not on top of your list? Is it because the "innovation" Apple brought last decade offsets those lives lost at Chinese factories? Why is Google collecting data about which apps you use and which websites you visit on your phone not worse than Facebook doing it through a VPN [6]?

This is not meant to address your comment specifically or personally push you in any way shape or form, I just want to address all comments of people claiming "Facebook is worse than Google" and putting Google in some sort of moral high-ground.

There's no good company vs bad company here. These are all companies, and companies have morals when it makes business sense. Our job is to not fall for PR games and make them accountable on all fronts, and if you look past the PR, I personally think, you realize that vouching for a company to beat another just hurts everyone.

[1]: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/09/how-g...

[2]: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/12/facebook-rupert-murdoch-thre...

[3]: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/01/07/suicide-chinese-...

[4]: https://nypost.com/2018/04/16/amazon-warehouse-workers-pee-i...

[5]: https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2017/12/7-examples-ho...

[6]: https://techcrunch.com/2018/02/12/facebook-starts-pushing-it...