I don't think it was meant so much as a zinger. It was more of an outsider's clueful view of what the Zuckerberg character has been doing wrong all those years. Judging by the portrayal in the movie, the Zuckerberg character actually has been trying really hard to be an asshole -- emulating the Sean Parker character when that role model stepped into view. Of course, he was initially told he was an asshole before meeting Parker; it seems he was aiming for that kind of sense of superiority before, though in a less focused manner, perhaps by trying to achieve a level of "cool" in general that was informed by the "coolness" of the assholes around him at Harvard. The Parker character just stepped neatly into the role of The Perfect Asshole for the Zuckerberg character.
Note that I refer to the characters, and particularly to the Zuckerberg character. I do not know enough about Parker to make any guesses about whether he is anything like the character in this movie. I also think that the real Zuckerberg either is not simply trying to be an asshole, but rather is an asshole, or has tried hard and long enough that he succeeded. Zuckerberg's now-famous quote about The Facebook's early users being dumbfucks for "trusting" him suggests he was an asshole from day one.
Zuckerberg's now-famous quote about The Facebook's early users being dumbfucks for "trusting" him suggests he was an asshole from day one.
I don't agree. There are many things that comment might have been. For example, it could have been mock-cynical humour. The truth is we don't know and it's impossible to tell. What it undeniably is, though, is convenient for anyone who'd like some "evidence" to go with their pre-existing judgment.
I'm not that interested in Facebook and have never paid much attention to Zuckerberg, but after seeing the movie I was curious and read a few things. They confirmed my pre-existing judgment, which is that he's nothing like the nasty Aspergerite of the movie. Also, a lot of people I respect feel protective towards him and stand up for him. That indicates something. So why, I wonder, do so many others hate him? Even if he has done every single bad thing that's been reported (obviously an upper bound on grounds for hate) the intensity of emotion people have about this guy still seems excessive. Well, there's a simple explanation at hand: he's the youngest self-made billionaire ever. Anyone in that position would be widely hated. It's just easier for people to cope with his massive success if they can add the idea that he's an asshole -- these are two mental molecules that bond into a very stable compound -- because now the brain can say, "I may not be the youngest billionaire in the world, but at least I'm not an asshole". Frankly, when we find ourselves feeling angry in this way, it's time to look in a mirror.
Oh and one more thing about the zingers: that script seemed to me to have been optimized for how many smug one-liners could be crammed into it, with no concern for how people actually think or talk. This is good writing? It's writing designed to get people to say "what good writing". I'm surprised that so many critics and smart people fall for this; it's the intellectual equivalent of mistaking ostentatious glitz for taste. To me, Sorkin and Mezrich are the real assholes of this story.
What annoys me about Zuckerberg is his own obvious connection to Facebook's in-practice attitudes toward user privacy.
Perhaps "asshole" is the wrong term for him, really. It's possible he even means well. Meaning well is no excuse for taking advantage of people, pulling regular bait-and-switch maneuvers, and generally doing things on a regular basis that show obvious and nigh-malicious disregard for the privacy concerns of millions of credulous users.
I have no problem with people being billionaires. I hope to be one myself some day (hope springs eternal), and I'd have nothing but respect for how Zuckerberg got there if he had not used such sketchy tactics as part of his path to riches.
