> You would have to really strain even to call Zuckerberg's statement a statement of fact, and the factual elements are just "we invest [an amount]" and "we do [efforts]".

You think such a weak claim is still a strain? That's the weakest possible factual interpretation.

But I don't think we should ignore "so much [...] to make sure" or "industry leading". If there was nobody prioritizing teen safety, or if that team had no power while teams targeting teens had power, then his statement was a lie. It's not just an opinion over whether the end result was shoddy.

▲

thaumasiotes 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> But I don't think we should ignore "so much [...] to make sure" or "industry leading".

You're wrong; one is tautologous and the other is clearly non-factual.

More specifically, if you say "that's why we do so much to make sure [that xxx...]", the literal meaning of "so much" is "as much as we do" - the claim can never be false.

Meanwhile, "industry leading" is puffery.

▲

Dylan16807 an hour ago | parent [-]

Being nonspecific is not a tautology. "so much" has a minimum to not be a lie.

Is it still puffery when there are objective measurements and you're not anywhere near leader? Well when you're testifying to congress and you puff that hard I think you should be punished regardless of definitions.

▲

thaumasiotes an hour ago | parent [-]

> "so much" has a minimum to not be a lie.

Seriously, "so much" means nothing other than "that amount, whatever it might be". That is the meaning of "so" - it refers to the context. You can wish as hard as you want, but you won't change the meaning of common English words.

Compare Merriam-Webster's gloss for so much:

> by the amount indicated or suggested

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/so%20much

	▲	Dylan16807 26 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		It refers to context. That's not the same as meaning nothing or being a tautology. In context, it can be a lie. He indicated an amount that was not just "insert any number".