Thread by @jason_kint

3yrs ago today, NYT and Guardian (after threat from Facebook), broke massive scoop that Facebook's personal data had not only been sold to a political operative but FB had covered up what they ultimately labeled a "breach of trust." For 3yrs they've continued to cover it up. /1

Facebook had spent days bracing for the report even deciding to "leak" it out Fri night hours before NYT report by posting they were taking action against the political operative, Cambridge Analytica - several yrs too late.

Why? Because FB's cover-up was about to blow open. /2

I'm going to use this thread to try to capture all of the misleading statements and cover-up efforts by Facebook now that we're three years out, several lawsuits are in deep discovery mode, Facebook antitrust lawsuits are underway and it's a new year so why not? here we go. /3

The political operative, Cambridge Analytica, already had a tattered reputation. Only three weeks earlier, UK Parliamentarians, having flown to DC to hear evidence from tech companies, asked 2 Facebook execs about FB's data being sold to CA and received this false answer. /4

Facebook then went dark - everything was on table: consumer protection laws, FTC consent decree, SEC insider trading, it was a bad as it could get. After 5 days they moved on their strategy: Zuckerberg would do CNN exclusive w/ tech reporter then rush to testify to Congress. /5

He as CEO would hurry to DC, testify to massive flat-footed committees with limited time per member, make Cambridge Analytica and guy named Aleksandr Kogan the fall guys, apologize, turn toward future. He was clear in his scapegoat: Kogan violated FB's terms selling the data. /6

Here is a good example of ⬆️.

"You have told us today — and you've told the world —
that Facebook was deceived by Aleksandr Kogan when he sold user information to Cambridge Analytica, correct?” - @SenBlumenthal

Zuckerberg: "Yes."

/7

Another one. See? Kogan/CA's fault. Not Facebook's.

"That information was then transferred out of our system to servers that this developer, Aleksandr Kogan, had. And then that person chose to then go sell the data to Cambridge Analytica." - Mark Zuckerberg to @SenMikeLee

/8

This framing became important. Evidence would soon show Cambridge Analytica had propped up Kogan's firm (GSR) to act as a "data launderer." In this manner, FB hadn’t directly “sold” data but they knew their data was sold. Leading to a question, why didn't they inform anyone? /9

This also would bring us to the timeline.
When did Facebook first know there was an issue with Cambridge Analytica? After digging around for a year, a Guardian reporter published on 12/11/15 leading to FB's initial cover-up and aggressive effort to kill off further reporting. /10

At Zuckerberg's April 11th, 2018 hearing, the clearest Q&A on when he was first aware of a Cambridge Analytica issue came from US Rep Mike Doyle:

Doyle: "When Guardian made the report [December 11, 2015], was that the first time you had heard about it?"

Zuckerberg: "Yes."

/11

Interestingly, if Zuckerberg was aware, then an insider also made a decision not to inform as @KamalaHarris probed:

Harris: "So there was a decision (in Dec '15) made on that basis not to inform the users. Is that correct?"

Mark Zuckerberg: "That's my understanding. Yes."

/12

Also were questions about Facebook's 2015 actions. Zuckerberg testified to @RepAnnaEshoo they immediately shut down the app:

Eshoo: "In 2015 you learned about it?"
Zuckerberg: "Yes."
Eshoo: "And you spoke to their CEO immediately?"
Zuckerberg: "We shut down the app."
but... /13

Zuckerberg made a correction on the same issue⬆️to the Senate on prior day. He first told @SenFeinstein Cambridge Analytica wasn't on the app in 2015 then he came back later in the hearing to awkwardly say they were and made a mistake by not banning them. /14

Timeline would become a big deal. SEC was investigating. If an insider (eg Zuckerberg, Sandberg, director) had traded on stock over years while the data issues were covered up, it would be hyper-sensitive. Here is a non-answer Facebook provided to Parliament May 14th, 2018. /15

A lawmaker in UK Parliament, @IanCLucas, IMHO had the best handle and had a nose that something was up with the timeline. He grilled Facebook’s CTO on the timeline at a hearing in London in April 2018. Later compared to gambling in Casablanca. /16

Just a month later, Aleksandr Kogan testified to @SenJohnThune under oath he told Facebook about the data operation at a meeting in Sep 2015. "There was no real indication of anything that was worrisome." (more on Kogan's partner in a minute). /17

Here again in Nov 27, 2018 with a dodge by Facebook's UK head of policy. At this point, Parliaments around globe had convened trying to get answers but Zuckerberg and Sandberg refused to testify - even under threat of subpoena. Zuckerberg even threatened the UK govt. /18

The question dodging on timeline would continue until Facebook ultimately settled with FTC and SEC for over $5 billion. A few months later 10/23/19, while Zuckerberg testified to House Financial Services, @AOC took an opportunity to inquire again - apparently surprising him. /19

Evidence continues to surface on timeline. @AGKarlRacine uncovered evidence of internal Facebook emails from Sept 2015. UK Commissioner Denham who led an investigation, famously raiding Cambridge Analytica's offices, said "were aware in 2014 and 2015" on a 11/23/20 podcast. /20

Interestingly, reports also surfaced Kogan had an “equal partner,” Joseph Chancellor, who we would shockingly learn was hired by Facebook Nov 9, 2015 and was still working there as the scandal broke in 2018. Zuckerberg was never asked about him when he testified April 2018. /21

Sheryl Sandberg testified to Congress *once* in Oct 2018. NYT reported she did so on agreement there would be no oral questions on this matter. Interestingly, @SenatorBurr asked in written questions about it and got this non-answer on awareness of Chancellor's hiring. /22

The consistent question to Facebook is how is it possible they could have hired a guy who committed what they called a "fraud" and then kept him employed throughout the cover-up. It made zero sense. Here is @JoStevensLabour, Parliament clearly exasperated. /23

Another area of concern is Facebook testified they demanded and received a certification the data was deleted immediately after Dec 2015 news reports. We would learn Cambridge Analytica sent a modified letter of no legal value in Apr 2017 so this was false to @SenWhitehouse. /24

Zuckerberg also testified they would do an unprecedented audit of all apps with similar access to Cambridge Analytica. Here is video of his stating this to @SenatorTester. /25

When @SenAmyKlobuchar asked similar questions, Zuckerberg again assured the importance of doing the full audit and said they needed to wait until the UK investigation ended as they had ceded to them. /26

Guess what? UK Commissioner Denham here just weeks ago, Feb 17, 2021, once again to dispute what Facebook testified to Congress it would do.

"I can confirm that Facebook have not contacted the ICO since October 2020 in respect of any such audit." /27

A few other items involving Facebook's board. Judge just ordered Facebook to turn over discovery on communications with Facebook's board in a State of RI lawsuit. They're asking why Facebook overpaid FTC by billions in order to protect Zuckerberg/Sandberg from depositions. /28

Curiously, Facebook's board member, Marc Andreessen, and noted trusted confidant of Zuckerberg, had sold nearly all of his Facebook stock (notably, in what was reported to be an automated trade) while the original Cambridge Analytica report was being finalized. /29

Also on the Facebook board, Peter Thiel. Curiously, the original NYT reporting had mentioned Thiel's company, Palantir, later reported it had an employee who "provided help" to guide Cambridge Analytica how to scrape data. No further information. /30 nytimes.com/2018/03/27/us/…

Senator @SenatorCantwell had asked Zuckerberg about Palantir. She also asked whether Facebook employees were involved with Cambridge Analytica in its work on the Trump campaign. It's nearly impossible to come with a scenario where Zuckerberg's answer wasn't false based. /31

Here is the moment @SenatorCantwell asked Zuckerberg about Palantir. I noted then, it’s still the most bizarre body language by Zuckerberg during hearings. Only other time I saw it was 18 months later when @AOC also asked about timeline and discussions with Peter Thiel. /32

Here is the video to the correction below as it’s also helpful to see the visual. I believe it was the only real-time correction and Joel Kaplan appeared surprised by it which I found curious at the time. /33