The city supervisor of San Francisco wants to take Mark Zuckerberg’s name off the city’s only public hospital. Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, pediatrician Priscilla Chan made a gift of $75 million to the hospital, where Dr. Chan once worked. Maybe they could just rename it the Dr. Priscilla Chan Hospital.
Citing Facebook’s mishandling of user privacy and its use of an opposition research firm to discredit critics, San Francisco Supervisor Aaron Peskin is pushing to remove Mark Zuckerberg’s name from the city’s public hospital.
The hospital was renamed Priscilla Chan and Mark Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital in 2015 after the Facebook CEO and his wife contributed $75 million to the hospital’s foundation.
Peskin on Tuesday asked the city attorney to outline a procedure for removing Zuckerberg’s name from the hospital. (Though it formally bears Chan’s name, the hospital often calls itself just “Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center” in signage.) In his remarks, Peskin cited the Cambridge Analytica scandal — in which the political data firm obtained the personal information of as many as 87 million Facebook users without their consent — and revelations in a recent New York Times article about Facebook’s hiring of a political consulting firm to discredit activists critical of the company. The social network, according to the Times, sought to cast some criticism of Facebook as anti-Semitic, while Facebook’s consulting firm was also accused of tactics tainted with anti-Semitism.
“It is not normal for private entities to use that information to spread, and in this case anti-Semitic, conspiracy theories on platforms they control,” Peskin said at Tuesday’s Board of Supervisors meeting. “It is not normal for Mark Zuckerberg and (Facebook chief operating officer) Sheryl Sandberg to refuse to accept responsibility and to publicly distance themselves from acts that they have personally instigated. … This is about the integrity of institutions and spaces that are overwhelmingly funded by public money and taxpayer dollars.”
A spokesman for City Attorney Dennis Herrera said the office has received the request to look into the matter and does not have a policy position on the issue.
The city has moved to rename some public structures before, such as Justin Herman Plaza on the Embarcadero, but removing Zuckerberg’s name from the hospital may trigger a dispute because of a naming agreement Zuckerberg and Chan reached with the hospital, which is owned and operated by the San Francisco Department of Public Health. The agreement, adopted by the Board of Supervisors in 2015, says the hospital is to be named the Priscilla Chan and Mark Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center for 50 years. The $75 million gift is believed to be the single largest contribution by private individuals in support of a public hospital in the United States.
“It is customary in hospital capital campaigns to provide naming opportunities in honor of major philanthropic gifts, as a critical strategy for raising awareness for the project within the community and for garnering action from other community members and philanthropists,” the resolution said.
The resolution does not explicitly address what would happen if the naming were revoked. When asked whether the hospital, if the city were to seek to remove Zuckerberg’s name, would have to give the money back, a hospital spokesman said he “couldn’t offer an opinion on that.”
Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital is the only public acute-care hospital in the city, serving about 108,000 people each year. Chan, Zuckerberg’s wife, previously worked there as a pediatrician.
Facebook did not respond to a request for comment.
In a written statement, hospital CEO Susan Ehrlich said Zuckerberg and Chan’s contributions have helped the hospital acquire new technology to serve patients, renovate the building and improve patient care.
“In acknowledgment and appreciation of that gift, our hospital now carries their names,” Ehrlich said. “Naming is an important convention in philanthropy that encourages additional donors. … We are honored that Dr. Chan and Mr. Zuckerberg thought highly enough of our hospital and staff, and the health of San Franciscans, to donate their resources to our mission.”

This is a gift that “keeps on TAKING” forever.
This is not my definition of a gift.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Gift is the German word for poison, which seems very apt in this case.
I have always been intrigued that the word for poison took on the opposite meaning in English, a Germanic language.
LikeLike
The Gift that keeps on giving
To grave and then beyond
A poison for the living
A scum that kills the pond
LikeLike
oh, that’s a great Big Tech Money description for “caring” about the kids: Forcing The Gift That Keeps On Taking
LikeLike
It is good that someone sees the obvious: people like Zuckerberg and the Sacklers will only respond to ultimatums backed by real consequences that impact their bottom line.
It is certainly not too much to expect that hospitals, museums and other institutions who have received what amounts to blood money will, at a bare minimum, not continue to glorify those who have contributed the money.
LikeLike
Our services become vanity projects for the 1% rather than a public service for the common good in the new gilded age of oligarchs?
LikeLiked by 1 person
It makes me think of all the so-called gifts bestowed on public education by tech billionaires. It’s not really charitable if there is a quid pro quo. The hospital should have no problem with changing the name. Fakebook has made a mockery of everything.
LikeLike
Most of the “gifts” are seed money for their investment. The “gift” is a Trojan Horse.
LikeLike
That’s an historic hospital. Maybe they could replace Zuckerberg’s name with some of the doctors and nurses from Ward 86, the first inpatient ward dedicated to patients with AIDS.
https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2011/06/9988/sfghs-ward-86-pioneering-hiv-aids-care-30-years
LikeLike
Next steps:
Get rid of their birth certificates and proof of citizenship’
Then label them as illegal immigrants, confiscate all their wealth, and send them to Mexico to join the caravan of immigrants seeking asylum in the US who left the violence and death in their Central American home countries to find a safer place to live.
Since the Suckerbergs can’t prove the came from one of those dangerous to live in countries in Central Amercia, they will be denied entry to the U.S> and become poor people without a country to call home.
All of their confiscated wealth will be applied to pay down some of the national debt.
LikeLike
Gifts with “strings attached”, implied or explicit, aren’t ever gifts- they’re products for barter. Bill Gates trades money for control. Charles Koch admitted it’s what he does in a speech reported by Greenpeace.
LikeLike