Facebook can't hide its problems behind a new name
wired.com
wired.com
Rather it's like Google becoming Alphabet, where it's just more of a legal process having a top level different name brand that Facebook and everything else falls under.
Not necessarily evil but very, very morally objectionable. Inaction is also a decision, inaction on the face of mounting facts that your platform is damaging people is definitely borderline evil.
Not sure how you judge that, yeah, social networks pose a lot of challenges, a safe food supply is also a huge challenge (keeping quality from planting all the way to processing, storage and so on) and we don't accept food poisoning as "it's just a side-effect of posing a lot of challenges".
As it is now, it's a free market. Sure, there are issues---but the people who use Facebook regularly think they are manageable or nonexistant. Facebook themselves though think they're doing no wrong (kind of like a casino who bankrupts people but justifies it as proving 'entertainment').
To be fair, FB spends huge amount of money and resource to deal with the various problems that are well identified. I don't see inaction there.
> we don't accept food poisoning as "it's just a side-effect of posing a lot of challenges".
This is your interpretation that FB is akin to food poisoning, but this is not mine. Besides, a lot of business have potentially undesirable consequences (e.g. junk food leads to obesity and health problem) that we tolerate because we assume people are free to make their own choices.
But what's your solution exactly?