Finally. Here in SEC docs is what Facebook has painfully avoided public knowing and press has mostly missed documenting. Facebook data was ****SOLD**** to Cambridge Analytica. Can everyone please now say that Facebook personal data was sold rather than captured, transferred, etc?
"Moreover, when asked by reporters in 2017 about its investigation into the Cambridge Analytica matter, Facebook falsely claimed the company found no evidence of wrongdoing, thereby reinforcing the misleading statements in its periodic filings."
"Facebook did not disclose..,.until March 16, 2018, when the company— for the first time—publicly acknowledged on its website that it had learned of the violation of its policy in 2015. The price of Facebook shares declined substantially following the company’s disclosure."
2 things here. I believe SEC report documents Zuckerberg's misleading testimony about how diligently they reacted upon press. This is one of Facebook's greatest deceptions in intentions with the cover-up. ps CA certification wasn't similar to Kogan's.
@SenWhitehouse@SenBillNelson This begs the question what was the purpose of the 2012 FTC Consent Decree and the audits being done every other year by PWC??? 7 years and this is how this plays out?
@SenWhitehouse@SenBillNelson OMG, THERE IT IS. The FTC settlement is a distraction. The key report is the SEC report. Attempted whistleblowers knew prior to Guardian report, they were ignored and Facebook continued to take $ from "sketchy (to say the least) data modeling company” for political advertising.
@SenWhitehouse@SenBillNelson I don't say this lightly. Compare this answer by CEO Zuckerberg to @USRepMikeDoyle to the relevant section of the SEC settlement. I would have examined the stock sales of every insider aware during this period including officers/directors.
@SenWhitehouse@SenBillNelson@USRepMikeDoyle Woah this was 12 days before US elections. Facebook employees knew stuff was going on but their DC office appears to have frozen them. Consumers were deceived and harmed through their personal data likely in order to protect Facebook's reputation and share price.
@SenWhitehouse@SenBillNelson@USRepMikeDoyle "Although several employees in Facebook’s legal, policy, and communications groups who attended these meetings during the relevant period were aware of the researcher’s improper transfer of data to Cambridge, that incident was never discussed."
@SenWhitehouse@SenBillNelson@USRepMikeDoyle "Facebook knew, or should have known, that its Risk Factor disclosures in its annual reports on Form 10-K for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2015, 2016, and 2017, ...as incorporated into its Form S-8 registration statements, were materially misleading."
@SenWhitehouse@SenBillNelson@USRepMikeDoyle "During the relevant period, Facebook received approximately $29m in cash proceeds from the exercise of employee stock options. Facebook also granted restricted stock units to more than 17,000 new employees..."
@SenWhitehouse@SenBillNelson@USRepMikeDoyle Here is the part where Facebook (after covering up incident for nearly 2 1/2 years) burnt The New York Times and Guardian by preempting their reporting once they had dutifully come to Facebook for comment on their findings.
@SenWhitehouse@SenBillNelson@USRepMikeDoyle@AllMattNYT@carolecadwalla by the way, this is the "certification" between the CEO of Cambridge Analytica and Facebook. The red arrow is mine pointing to language which makes this agreement almost meaningless beyond the fact Facebook didn't sign it.
@AGKarlRacine Time to bump a few important docs back up for a reality check. SEC complaint says Kogan told Facebook in June 2016 he had sold 30 million underlying records to a political operative. (1) seems obvious Facebook accelerated its cover-up at that point after 6+ months of deflection.
@AGKarlRacine Interesting timing as Kogan told FB this in June 2016 and he then signed an agreement with Facebook on June 24 which happened to be the result date of the Brexit Referendum. It was quite an agreement to review when it surfaced at @CommonsCMS. p19-33 parliament.uk/documents/comm…
@AGKarlRacine@CommonsCMS at minimum, this is why Facebook's top EU policy exec testifying in Feb 2018 CA didn't have FB data 1 month before global press attention was beyond ridiculous having been told in June 2016 30mm records had been sold to CA. @carolecadwalla is right, we prob should say he lied.
@AGKarlRacine@CommonsCMS@carolecadwalla side note, the May 2018 @CommonsCMS correspondence was a valuable written exchange. Source of many new details and some of their best obfuscations. It came during time of pressure for Zuckerberg to testify. He ultimately danced through Brussels instead. parliament.uk/documents/comm…
@AGKarlRacine@CommonsCMS@carolecadwalla and routing this thread back to another old one where I list a lot of the obfuscations... and probably connect to another thread of evidence. my timeline is a Facebook rabbit hole. So were their practices.
@AGKarlRacine@CommonsCMS@carolecadwalla Remember when Facebook famously went dark for five days after Cambridge Analytica scandal broke globally? I'm rewatching CEO Zuckerberg's first highly promoted CNN exclusive interview to compare to the SEC report yesterday. I've cued the spot for you.
@AGKarlRacine@CommonsCMS@carolecadwalla Put aside that Zuckerberg testified under oath and answers here that Facebook first learned from The Guardian report, I'm having trouble with "as far as we understood around the time of that episode there was no data out there." Yellow highlights are mine.
@AGKarlRacine@CommonsCMS@carolecadwalla Now reviewing Kogan's testimony where he testified to @SenJohnThune:
- Facebook visited Kogan in Sept 2015 and were told about his selling of data.
- His "equal partner" disclosed what they were doing during his job interview with Facebook (note: he was hired 11/9/15)
@AGKarlRacine@CommonsCMS@carolecadwalla@SenJohnThune just in, Facebook response to DC request, in light of SEC filing, to unseal internal emails showing FB had awareness of Cambridge Analytica problems earlier than Zuckerberg told Congress. When reports of emails surfaced, FB said they were about a different "scraping" incident.
+1 for lawmakers not willing to get rolled, misled or lied to by Facebook. Parliament asks for an explanation by Aug 12th why last week’s “SEC Complaint seemingly directly contradicts oral and written evidence”
New update from Facebook v DC. They're still working incredibly hard to keep internal email chain sealed which reports to show prior knowledge of Cambridge Analytica. In worst case, it may also lead to perjury or securities issues for Facebook officer(s).
Justice takes time. What he knew when. AOC will remember this, “Their lawsuit says Zuckerberg—facing the risk of personal liability over the data privacy scandal—got himself out of trouble by agreeing to pay a larger-than-necessary $5 billion fine with shareholder money.” 1/3
Here is the full report from Bloomberg on Zuckerberg’s deposition which apparently was cut short and late on docs on Dec 3rd. Board members Thiel, Andreessen, others all being deposed these weeks. Press allowed Facebook to rewrite history on this. 2/3 news.bloomberglaw.com/business-and-p…
Here is a good thread that will get you into the details. Sheryl Sandberg also deposed although her assumed prior SEC deposition was sealed. We did finally get Zuckerberg’s which showed his nerves and that the scandal was on his mind much earlier. Thanks to @zamaan_qureshi 3/3
Overnight: FTC plans to call CEO Zuckerberg and (former) CTO Schroepfer in first 2 wks of trial (late April) in DC seeking to break up the company for abuse of monopoly laws. Also on their short list are some very big roles and names. Very likely driving behaviors at the top. /1
As I know their roles...
Chris Cox - chief product officer who took a break when scandals accelerated, and avoided testimony in UK.
Javier Olivan - now COO, key lieutenant
Sheryl Sandberg - former COO, on everything
Alex Schultz - key growth hacker, now CMO /2
Adam Mosseri - key lieutenant, now runs Insta
Dave Wehner - former CFO, deal approval including $19B with no real revenue WhatsApp
Fidji Simo - (former) always in mix, product leadership
Guy Rosen - Onavo alleged packet sniffing of WhatsApp, Snap /3
Woah. Google filed redacted versions of its Summary Judgment exhibits in Texas adtech antitrust case ahead of the March 31 trial. Although this case mirrors DOJ's case awaiting decision, it has even more eye-popping evidence. And an expert suggesting $29B in penalties. /1
"Project Bernanke" is an oldie but goodie that gets a lot of discussion. ICYMI, Google would allegedly increase the first highest and the second highest bid in its 2nd-price auctions then reinvest the "saved" funds back into other bids to Google wins more auctions. /2
The problem is while it may have ended up providing more revenue to the publisher (from/through Google) and no doubt to Google, Inc, it allegedly ignored the revenue which could have come through another channel if Google didn't manipulate the rev share as it ran the auctions. /3
US v Google II Closing arguments today.
70min for DOJ-> 95min for Google-> 20min for DOJ. Having predicted this case as better odds than search case (Google already lost in August), nothing changed my mind today. I wrote down: influence/$, complexity, deception, and arrogance. /1
I'm staying high level on perception first as findings of fact already covered much. On influence/$, DOJ pointed out early on and then again in rebuttal that every single witness presented by Google (except one) was paid or had grants from Google. /2
On complexity, Google again executed on its spaghetti defense with lead counsel, Karen Dunn, bookending trial by running over as she did in her opening. She appeared to skip dozens of slides, many minutes of close. And she loaded her slides while talking twice as fast as DOJ! /3
Bam. There is it. US Department of Justice has filed - requesting divestiture of Chrome as a remedy for court's finding against Google. Android at risk, too. /1
As it relates to Android, here is how DOJ puts it. Forced divestiture is option that "swiftly, efficiently, and decisively strikes at the locus of some anticompetitive conduct at issue here" but we're ok with tight behavioral remedies with option to divest if they don't work. /2
Revenue sharing for search default and/or preferential treatment - dead. Google's tens of billions to Apple - dead (last I saw it's about 15% of Apple's profits). Reminder, this all needs to be argued and approved by Court and then will get appealed. Still far off. /3
KA-BOOM. So when Google and its proxies (see so-called Chamber of Progress), friendly academics and analysts continue to suggest Chrome has nothing to do with the case, please ask them how many days they were at the trial. 1/3
This is super important. It’s an area @DCNorg (premium publishers) are intensely interested and concerned they get right around ability to restrict. The Court and trial made it clear they understood its importance during trial. We’ll be reading closely on Wednesday. 2/3
Here is the full report from Bloomberg who consistent with the entire trial showed up every day, did the hard work, and now got the massive scoop ahead of Wed filing. 3/3 bloomberg.com/news/articles/…