Connect with us

Published

on

In this article

A pedestrian walks in front of a new logo and the name ‘Meta’ on the sign in front of Facebook headquarters on October 28, 2021 in Menlo Park, California.
Justin Sullivan | Getty Images

With its name change to Meta, the company formerly known as Facebook is trying to eliminate what some employees have called a “brand tax” on apps like Instagram, Messenger and WhatsApp.

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced the rebranding on Thursday, following a brutal seven weeks of document dumps that showed Facebook knew of the harm its products cause and has refused to address them. But the brand tax dates as far back as the 2016 presidential election, when Facebook turned into a haven of hateful content and misinformation.

Facebook’s other services, most notably Instagram and Messenger, have struggled to distance themselves from the constant embarrassment that’s plagued their parent company over the past half-decade, according to people with knowledge of the matter.

Brand separation became particularly difficult in 2019, when Facebook announced it would tag all of its services with Facebook at the end of their names. Messenger became Messenger from Facebook, and the other apps turned into Instagram from Facebook and WhatsApp from Facebook.

Facebook said at the time that the rebranding was intended to provide clarity to users. The same was true for its Oculus virtual reality unit and business software offering Workplace, which also got the “from Facebook” label.

“This brand change is a way to better communicate our ownership structure to the people and businesses who use our services to connect, share, build community and grow their audiences,” the company said in a press release on Nov. 4, 2019.

But behind closed doors, Facebook wasn’t expressing concern about consumer confusion. Rather, the company was trying to restore the strength of its name after a series of public relations setbacks, most notably the Cambridge Analytica data hijacking scandal in 2018, several former employees told CNBC.

Facebook’s own brand was in the dumps. Zuckerberg decided to consolidate the branding because he thought associating Facebook with the company’s less-sullied services would help, said the former employees, who asked not to be named because the information was confidential. 

With an image of himself on a screen in the background, Facebook co-founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg testifies before the House Financial Services Committee in the Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill October 23, 2019 in Washington, DC.
Chip Somodevilla | Getty Images

Some employees advised Zuckerberg to follow the path taken by Google, which created the parent company name Alphabet in 2015, rather than attaching Facebook to everything, sources said.

Zuckerberg’s decision to instead showcase Facebook was not driven by data. On the contrary, he was presented with research showing that associating any of the company’s products with the Facebook brand caused trust to drop, said one former executive.

Another employee said that was seen in research done for Facebook’s video-calling device, Portal, announced in 2018. Data indicated that putting the name Facebook on it would reduce public trust. The company went with the name Facebook Portal anyway.

When asked for a comment for this story, a spokeswoman for the company directed CNBC to a Thursday post from Meta Chief Marketing Officer Alex Schultz.

“In 2019, we rolled out new branding that linked together all of our products, but still kept the Facebook name for both the company and our original app,” Schultz wrote. “But over time it was clear that the shared Facebook name could cause confusion, not only with people using products such as WhatsApp or Instagram, but also with constituencies we work with. Helping people have clarity when something is coming from the company versus the Facebook app is an important reason for this change.”

Instagram hurt the most

Instagram was hit particularly hard by the 2019 rebranding.

The photo app is used mostly by teens and young people, who have long had a negative view of Facebook. The “big blue app,” as Facebook is known, was seen as the place where parents and weird uncles go to share stories and comment on their relatives’ posts.

Instagram’s marketing employees began seeing, through quarterly brand tracking results, that the new label was causing harm.

They tried to make the “from Facebook” font smaller, not use it at all or play with the colors in a way that would hide the Facebook name, ex-employees said. Ultimately, they were overruled, according to one former employee.

Zuckerberg insisted that Facebook had turned Instagram into a screaming success since acquiring it for $1 billion in 2012, and it was time for Instagram to give back, a former executive recalled. 

Instagram marketers would eventually be measured by how well they tied the brands together. It was mandated by Zuckerberg and non-negotiable.

Messenger, by contrast, was given permission to create some sense of separation, according to multiple employees. 

Unlike Instagram, Oculus and WhatsApp, which were all acquired, Messenger was homegrown. Facebook turned it into a separate app in 2014. To attract younger users, Messenger was given the “blessing” a year ago to take some steps to improve the brand, two former employees said.

Messenger rolled out a new logo last year with a gradient color, predominantly purple, similar to Instagram’s logo. It was part of the Messenger team’s effort to position the app for Millennials and Gen Z users, who have been flocking to other services like TikTok.

Removing the Facebook name

As Meta, there’s no guarantee that Facebook’s brand tax dissipates.

But Zuckerberg has at least changed his approach, less than two years after adding “from Facebook” to all of his company’s main services.

The company has already started rebranding several of its units. The hardware division, previously known as Facebook Reality Labs, will now be called Reality Labs. The payments division, which was known as F2 (Facebook Financial), will now be Novi, the name of the company’s cryptocurrency wallet product. 

Zuckerberg remains defiant following a series of document leaks by ex-employee Frances Haugen, the whistleblower, and the many stories that followed from the Wall Street Journal and other publications. One of the most notable stories showed that the company knew Instagram was detrimental to teenagers’ mental health and was doing little about it. 

“My view is that what we are seeing is a coordinated effort to selectively use leaked documents to paint a false picture of our company,” Zuckerberg said after the company’s quarterly earnings report earlier this week.

Some of the documents released showed that the number of teenage users of the Facebook app in the U.S. has declined by 13% since 2019, with a projected drop of 45% over the next two years, according to The Verge. Additionally, Facebook researchers found that the company was not expecting people born after 2000 to join the social network until they were 24 or 25 years old, if they ever joined, Bloomberg reported.

Facebook addressed that issue on Monday in its earnings report. The company said it would begin pivoting both Instagram and Facebook to feature more videos from the Reels product in an effort to attract young users.

Zuckerberg said the company will try to make all of its services appealing to young adults, but he acknowledged that “this shift will take years, not months, to fully execute.”

Moving away from the Facebook brand is the first big step.

WATCH: The metaverse is things you can do with goggles strapped to your face

Continue Reading

Technology

Week in review: The Nasdaq’s worst week since April, three trades, and earnings

Published

on

By

Week in review: The Nasdaq's worst week since April, three trades, and earnings

Continue Reading

Technology

Too early to bet against AI trade, State Street suggests 

Published

on

By

Too early to bet against AI trade, State Street suggests 

Momentum and private assets: The trends driving ETFs to record inflows

State Street is reiterating its bullish stance on the artificial intelligence trade despite the Nasdaq’s worst week since April.

Chief Business Officer Anna Paglia said momentum stocks still have legs because investors are reluctant to step away from the growth story that’s driven gains all year.

“How would you not want to participate in the growth of AI technology? Everybody has been waiting for the cycle to change from growth to value. I don’t think it’s happening just yet because of the momentum,” Paglia told CNBC’s “ETF Edge” earlier this week. “I don’t think the rebalancing trade is going to happen until we see a signal from the market indicating a slowdown in these big trends.”

Paglia, who has spent 25 years in the exchange-traded funds industry, sees a higher likelihood that the space will cool off early next year.

“There will be much more focus about the diversification,” she said.

Her firm manages several ETFs with exposure to the technology sector, including the SPDR NYSE Technology ETF, which has gained 38% so far this year as of Friday’s close.

The fund, however, pulled back more than 4% over the past week as investors took profits in AI-linked names. The fund’s second top holding as of Friday’s close is Palantir Technologies, according to State Street’s website. Its stock tumbled more than 11% this week after the company’s earnings report on Monday.

Despite the decline, Paglia reaffirmed her bullish tech view in a statement to CNBC later in the week.

Meanwhile, Todd Rosenbluth suggests a rotation is already starting to grip the market. He points to a renewed appetite for health-care stocks.

“The Health Care Select Sector SPDR Fund… which has been out of favor for much of the year, started a return to favor in October,” the firm’s head of research said in the same interview. “Health care tends to be a more defensive sector, so we’re watching to see if people continue to gravitate towards that as a way of diversifying away from some of those sectors like technology.”

The Health Care Select Sector SPDR Fund, which has been underperforming technology sector this year, is up 5% since Oct. 1. It was also the second-best performing S&P 500 group this week.

Disclaimer

Continue Reading

Technology

People with ADHD, autism, dyslexia say AI agents are helping them succeed at work

Published

on

By

People with ADHD, autism, dyslexia say AI agents are helping them succeed at work

Neurodiverse professionals may see unique benefits from artificial intelligence tools and agents, research suggests. With AI agent creation booming in 2025, people with conditions like ADHD, autism, dyslexia and more report a more level playing field in the workplace thanks to generative AI.

A recent study from the UK’s Department for Business and Trade found that neurodiverse workers were 25% more satisfied with AI assistants and were more likely to recommend the tool than neurotypical respondents.

“Standing up and walking around during a meeting means that I’m not taking notes, but now AI can come in and synthesize the entire meeting into a transcript and pick out the top-level themes,” said Tara DeZao, senior director of product marketing at enterprise low-code platform provider Pega. DeZao, who was diagnosed with ADHD as an adult, has combination-type ADHD, which includes both inattentive symptoms (time management and executive function issues) and hyperactive symptoms (increased movement).

“I’ve white-knuckled my way through the business world,” DeZao said. “But these tools help so much.”

AI tools in the workplace run the gamut and can have hyper-specific use cases, but solutions like note takers, schedule assistants and in-house communication support are common. Generative AI happens to be particularly adept at skills like communication, time management and executive functioning, creating a built-in benefit for neurodiverse workers who’ve previously had to find ways to fit in among a work culture not built with them in mind.

Because of the skills that neurodiverse individuals can bring to the workplace — hyperfocus, creativity, empathy and niche expertise, just to name a few — some research suggests that organizations prioritizing inclusivity in this space generate nearly one-fifth higher revenue.

AI ethics and neurodiverse workers

“Investing in ethical guardrails, like those that protect and aid neurodivergent workers, is not just the right thing to do,” said Kristi Boyd, an AI specialist with the SAS data ethics practice. “It’s a smart way to make good on your organization’s AI investments.”

Boyd referred to an SAS study which found that companies investing the most in AI governance and guardrails were 1.6 times more likely to see at least double ROI on their AI investments. But Boyd highlighted three risks that companies should be aware of when implementing AI tools with neurodiverse and other individuals in mind: competing needs, unconscious bias and inappropriate disclosure.

“Different neurodiverse conditions may have conflicting needs,” Boyd said. For example, while people with dyslexia may benefit from document readers, people with bipolar disorder or other mental health neurodivergences may benefit from AI-supported scheduling to make the most of productive periods. “By acknowledging these tensions upfront, organizations can create layered accommodations or offer choice-based frameworks that balance competing needs while promoting equity and inclusion,” she explained.

Regarding AI’s unconscious biases, algorithms can (and have been) unintentionally taught to associate neurodivergence with danger, disease or negativity, as outlined in Duke University research. And even today, neurodiversity can still be met with workplace discrimination, making it important for companies to provide safe ways to use these tools without having to unwillingly publicize any individual worker diagnosis.

‘Like somebody turned on the light’

As businesses take accountability for the impact of AI tools in the workplace, Boyd says it’s important to remember to include diverse voices at all stages, implement regular audits and establish safe ways for employees to anonymously report issues.

The work to make AI deployment more equitable, including for neurodivergent people, is just getting started. The nonprofit Humane Intelligence, which focuses on deploying AI for social good, released in early October its Bias Bounty Challenge, where participants can identify biases with the goal of building “more inclusive communication platforms — especially for users with cognitive differences, sensory sensitivities or alternative communication styles.”

For example, emotion AI (when AI identifies human emotions) can help people with difficulty identifying emotions make sense of their meeting partners on video conferencing platforms like Zoom. Still, this technology requires careful attention to bias by ensuring AI agents recognize diverse communication patterns fairly and accurately, rather than embedding harmful assumptions.

DeZao said her ADHD diagnosis felt like “somebody turned on the light in a very, very dark room.”

“One of the most difficult pieces of our hyper-connected, fast world is that we’re all expected to multitask. With my form of ADHD, it’s almost impossible to multitask,” she said.

DeZao says one of AI’s most helpful features is its ability to receive instructions and do its work while the human employee can remain focused on the task at hand. “If I’m working on something and then a new request comes in over Slack or Teams, it just completely knocks me off my thought process,” she said. “Being able to take that request and then outsource it real quick and have it worked on while I continue to work [on my original task] has been a godsend.”

Continue Reading

Trending