When you attack Mark Zuckerberg, surely you don’t mean the guy from ‘The Social Network’?

Biopics can distort perceptions for good, as is proven by the negative press on the Facebook founder.

A few days ago, Facebook creator Mark Zuckerberg pledged 99% of the company’s shares in his and his wife Priscilla Chan’s names to charity. The occasion was the birth of his daughter, Maxima. Had it been someone else, such a gesture on the part of one of the richest individuals on Earth would have been welcomed and celebrated. But in Zuckerberg’s case, the announcement was met with criticism. The manner in which he was mocked and chastised seemed as though many of the reactions were targetting the version of the technology giant created by the 2010 movie The Social Network rather than a real person.


Thanks to its depiction of Zuckerberg as a cold, ruthless and self-serving narcissist, the Aaron Sorkin scripted-film has changed the way Zuckerberg is seen in real life in spite of factual inaccuracies, such as showing him to be a spurned lover when he created Facebook even though he was dating the woman he would go on to marry. The impact of Zuckerberg’s act of charity was lost in the technicality of the decision. (A caveat stipulates that unlike a traditional fund, this amount would be invested in profit-making companies that were involved in developing innovations.)

The shadow of doubt over Zuckerberg’s actions goes beyond the purview of his personal space. When he changed his display picture to support Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Digital India drive during the latter’s US visit, Zuckerberg was accused of using Digital India to promote his free Internet access mission and, in the bargain, destroying net neutrality.

Yet another Sorkin-scripted biopic of a technological guru, Steve Jobs, has also been questioned for its authenticity.


Popular cinema often takes liberties to distort history in order to heighten the drama or transform heroes into superheroes. Such flights of fancy can be seen in Pearl Harbor (2001), which used fictionalised characters situated within a real event. The two heroes are shown bringing down more Japanese planes than in reality and flying to Japan to bomb Tokyo even though there is no record of such a mission.

A line passed off as a statement made by a Japanese admiral has, in fact, been lifted from Tora! Tora! Tora!, another movie about the same attack: “I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve.”

It’s not like such factual inaccuracies are a thing of the recent past. Made just two decades after the real event on which it was based, Battle of the Bulge (1965) bungled history to such an extent that it infuriated former American President, Dwight D Eisenhower, who also happened to be the Allied Commander during WWII. Among numerous goofs, the film was shot in temperate Spain as opposed to the bitterly cold locales of Belgium where the battle took place. Newer Korean War-era tanks were used instead of the real Tiger and Sherman tanks.

Writers and filmmakers often look for elements within characters that can be exaggerated in the interests of a compelling story. For David Lean’s The Bridge on the River Kwai (1957), writers Carl Foreman and Michael Wilson had ready reference material from the book of the same title by Pierre Boulle. However, the lead character, Colonel Nicholson (Alec Guinness), underwent a significant rewrite. The film is set in a Japanese prisoner of war camp, and shows Nicholson pushing his men towards building a bridge that would aid the Imperial Army’s plans. However, the book suggests that the real officer wasn’t as obsessed about pleasing the Japanese as he was in keeping his men alive and their spirit intact.

Such a shift is relatively harmless compared to what James Cameron’s Titanic (1997) did to a certain William Murdoch. Barring a resemblance to the name, the character of the first officer was completely changed by Cameron. The real-life hero who went down with the ship after helping hundreds of people is depicted as an unstable and heartless man who kills two people and takes a bribe from a rich passenger in exchange for a spot on a lifeboat.

We infer certain truths about real people from films based upon their lives and selectively infuse our own perceptions into the process. In Mark Zuckerberg’s case, thanks to scripted reality, we readily buy into Aaron Sorkin’s interpretation of how the man who created the greatest social platform is incapable of making or maintaining friends.

We welcome your comments at
Sponsored Content BY 

Why should inclusion matter to companies?

It's not just about goodwill - inclusivity is a good business decision.

To reach a 50-50 workplace scenario, policies on diversity need to be paired with a culture of inclusiveness. While diversity brings equal representation in meetings, board rooms, promotions and recruitment, inclusivity helps give voice to the people who might otherwise be marginalized or excluded. Inclusion at workplace can be seen in an environment that values diverse opinions, encourages collaboration and invites people to share their ideas and perspectives. As Verna Myers, a renowned diversity advocate, puts it “Diversity is being invited to the party, inclusion is being asked to dance.”

Creating a sense of belonging for everyone is essential for a company’s success. Let’s look at some of the real benefits of a diverse and inclusive workplace:

Better decision making

A whitepaper by Cloverpop, a decision making tool, established a direct link between inclusive decision making and better business performance. The research discovered that teams that followed an inclusive decision-making process made decisions 2X faster with half the meetings and delivered 60% better results. As per Harvard Business School Professor Francesca Gino, this report highlights how diversity and inclusion are practical tools to improve decision making in companies. According to her, changing the composition of decision making teams to include different perspectives can help individuals overcome biases that affect their decisions.

Higher job satisfaction

Employee satisfaction is connected to a workplace environment that values individual ideas and creates a sense of belonging for everyone. A research by Accenture identified 40 factors that influence advancement in the workplace. An empowering work environment where employees have the freedom to be creative, innovative and themselves at work, was identified as a key driver in improving employee advancement to senior levels.


A research by stated the in India, 62% of innovation is driven by employee perceptions of inclusion. The study included responses from 1,500 employees from Australia, China, Germany, India, Mexico and the United States and showed that employees who feel included are more likely to go above and beyond the call of duty, suggest new and innovative ways of getting work done.

Competitive Advantage

Shirley Engelmeier, author of ‘Inclusion: The New Competitive Business Advantage’, in her interview with Forbes, talks about the new global business normal. She points out that the rapidly changing customer base with different tastes and preferences need to feel represented by brands. An inclusive environment will future-proof the organisation to cater to the new global consumer language and give it a competitive edge.

An inclusive workplace ensures that no individual is disregarded because of their gender, race, disability, age or other social and cultural factors. Accenture has been a leading voice in advocating equal workplace. Having won several accolades including a perfect score on the Human Rights Campaign’s Corporate equality index, Accenture has demonstrated inclusive and diverse practices not only within its organisation but also in business relationships through their Supplier Inclusion and Diversity program.

In a video titled ‘She rises’, Accenture captures the importance of implementing diverse policies and creating an inclusive workplace culture.


To know more about inclusion and diversity, see here.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of Accenture and not by the Scroll editorial team.