Mark Zuckerberg has friended us again. We are forgiven. He has relented and decided not to block the sharing of Australian news on his company's pages.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
It's hard to know why. Was his power play doomed from the moment his company told an elected government its citizens would no longer be able to read information about health during an epidemic?
Mr Zuckerberg may have realised that the publicity was playing really badly. He had picked up his ball in high dudgeon and stomped off the field, only to trip on his laces.
Or was it the dollar? There is a view that what really changed Facebook's mind was the federal government's threat to pull all its advertising from the social network.
The fear (or hope) then would have been that the states and territories followed suit, and the next thing Mr Z's company might have felt was a movement of activist investors standing up in company AGMs across the globe, calling for advertising boycotts.
It would have been an ironic fate - Facebook, a medium for the lynch-mob mentality, turned on by the mob.
But it hasn't happened. We're all friends again - except I'm not.
Forgive my strong feelings, but if you had been a journalist in a small town in country Australia, you would know the poison which Facebook permits. It is a forum for hate.
Every petty grievance gets an airing and then an amplification as the crowd gets its boots on and wades in. Useful, Facebook undoubtedly is for all those school and community groups, but nice it is not.
Have a chat with a teenage girl about what it's like to be in her room upstairs in the apparent safety of home when suddenly all her friends unfriend her. Online bullying is vicious and painful.
Facebook's basic argument is that it is not really responsible for content. It's just a forum, a neutral medium through which information passes.
"At Facebook, our role is to make sure there is a level playing field, not to be a political participant ourselves," says its vice-president for global affairs and communications, Nick Clegg.
"To use tennis as an analogy, our job is to make sure the court is ready - the surface is flat, the lines painted, the net at the correct height. But we don't pick up a racquet and start playing. How the players play the game is up to them, not us."
But Facebook is getting caught up in the complexity of its position. After all, it regularly makes the editorial decision to accept lucrative political advertisements.
Have a chat with a teenage girl about what it's like to be in her room upstairs in the apparent safety of home when suddenly all her friends unfriend her. Online bullying is vicious and painful.
And its blocking of Mr Trump - albeit belatedly - as he fired up his supporters with false claims about the election result, was an editorial decision, the kind that reporters and editors in reputable news organisations make every day. Do we report this fact? Is it a fact? Are we putting too much weight on this claim? Does that claim stand up?
The truth is, Facebook does make editorial decisions, but it doesn't seem to want the regulation which that demands. It wants the power and the dollars but not the responsibility.
Newspapers and broadcasters are governed by rules because telling people what's going on is too important not to regulate. Democracy doesn't work if people don't trust information.
Sometimes those rules are made by elected governments - rules about the concentration of ownership or about political advertising on television. And sometimes those rules are provided by the tradition and ways of journalism - don't lie to the audience, show scepticism, give both sides an airing.
It is true that the media does not always - often does not - live up to the highest standards, but, by and large, the biases are transparent and outright falsehood is absent. Reputable newspapers and broadcasters don't lie.
Facebook's great fear is that it will be broken up, like the American rail, oil, sugar and steel monopolies owned by the "robber barons" were just over a century ago.
A week ago, Scott Morrison's great phrase about Facebook and Google was: "They may be changing the world, but that doesn't mean they run it."
He may be factually incorrect, but the sentiment was right. And recognising that their power needs to be cut down is a start.
- Steve Evans is a Canberra Times reporter.