Is it fair to criticize Mark Zuckerberg for the controversial billing practices of the San Francisco hospital named after him?

Mark Zuckerberg

The billing practices of the Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital are under fire after a Vox article detailed how some privately insured patients have been surprised to receive a bill as high as five figures.
The public hospital was named after Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan, after the couple made a $75 million donation in 2015 to build a trauma center.
Some people are now criticizing Zuckerberg himself on social media, despite the fact that he has no impact on the day-to-day operations of the hospital.

People are criticizing Mark Zuckerberg for the billing practices of a San Francisco-based hospital named after him that has reportedly left some privately insured patients with five-figure debts.

Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, formerly called San Francisco General Hospital, was named after the Facebook founder in 2015 after he and his wife, Priscilla Chan, made a $75 million donation. However, Zuckerberg himself has no impact on the day-to-day operations, though it is largely associated with his likeness.

Emergency room bills reviewed by Vox detailed how the hospital is considered "out-of-network" for those with private insurance. This means it doesn't accept the kind of health-insurance coverage that most people get through their jobs, which can leave people with large bills if they visit the hospital for care — for example, one woman ended up with a $31,250 bill for a broken ankle.

On social media, some people have been criticizing the Facebook founder for the hotel's policies, showing just how sticky it can be to have a hospital with your name on it.

Can you imagine putting your name on a hospital, giving them $75m & then giving a no comment when your namesake price gouges your community?

Of course not, but #zuckerberg did.

What’s the point of having tens of billions of dollars if you make the world worse? Seriously @finkd https://t.co/wkiYfUL592
— jason 🦄🦄🦄🦄🦄🦄 (@Jason) January 7, 2019

But the crucial context is that Zuckerberg is not currently involved in implementing policy at the hospital. The public hospital, in its own words, is there to serve those who are "underserved" by only accepting public health coverage (i.e. Medicaid, Medicare, and all the programs that fall underneath), according to the Vox report.

The perils of naming rights https://t.co/SfZiyRZR74
— nilay patel (@reckless) January 7, 2019

The fact that Mark Zuckerberg is getting flak for the billing practices of SF General is just amazing. Dude gave $75m for a $1bn+ renovation (ie he bought some equipment). He’s not setting policy. https://t.co/UW9ZYezGNa
— Julia Carrie Wong (@juliacarriew) January 7, 2019

In fairness, Zuckerberg gave this public hospital $75 million and got his name stuck on it. He has no financial interest in it.

It’s a huge public hospital that put itself out of network for all insurers - the less sexy reality.
But don’t let that stop the click baiting. https://t.co/EGm6sfi8wm
— Quentin Hardy (@qhardy) January 7, 2019

Yes, "the less sexy reality," as one Googler put it, is far more nuanced. But with his name front and center on the hospital, the Facebook CEO has found himself in this position before. Take for example just last month, when a San Francisco politician asked the city attorney to remove Zuckerberg's name from the hospital amid Facebook's latest privacy scandal.

This damning story by @sarahkliff underscores how much of what we think of as a “marketplace” for medical services is simply a fiction. When you’re incapacitated, you can’t make the informed choices about hospitals that you can with brands of yogurt. https://t.co/f2WWv7Qmgv
— Brian Fung (@b_fung) January 7, 2019

I am really confused about this. If you refuse to work with any insurers, then how can you rely on those with insurance to cover the costs of the hospital?

You aren't relying on their insurance. You're relying on the hope they have enough personal wealth to cover the bill. pic.twitter.com/s6kqzDYB1k
— Romancing the Nope (@RomancingNope) January 7, 2019

Thread 👇

I have spent a year reading emergency room bills. I've read about 1,200 of them.

A few months ago, I noticed that one hospital had bills that were *really* different from the rest: Zuckerberg San Francisco General. (1/11)https://t.co/XjHpmZq3i9
— Sarah Kliff (@sarahkliff) January 7, 2019

Though, the fact remains: denying all private insurance is quite rare and, frankly, frowned upon by many healthcare advocates.

The Vox report examines how when someone is involved in a traumatic accident near Zuckerberg Hospital, they are most likely going to be taken there — potentially without recollection or the ability to search for an in-network provider — making it more likely they will be surprised when the bill comes in the mail.

It's a valid concern, and some politicians are already looking into how to combat these "surprise" ER bills, but that's a different discussion than as to whether Zuckerberg is to blame for patient experiences at the hospital he donated to.

Wait, Mark Zuckerberg doesn’t run the billing department at San Francisco General Hospital?
— Nu Wexler (@wexler) January 7, 2019

And finally, in case the answer to that sarcastic question wasn't clear — no, Zuckerberg doesn't control what gets billed and how much.

Sarah Kliff, writer of the Vox piece, explains in her reporting how she found the city of San Francisco, or more pointedly, the city's Board of Supervisors, is the one setting the prices.

If you're a San Francisco resident frustrated with how Zuckerberg General is billing, a lot of your frustration should really rest with the city board of supervisors.

You should also know that SF Board of Supervisors President Malia Cohen declined to comment for my story. (6/6)
— Sarah Kliff (@sarahkliff) January 7, 2019

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: We put the 7 best smartphones of 2018 head-to-head and there was a clear winner for the best value