woah, I have the unsealed docs here. this is the Facebook census / fake accounts case DCN filed to get unsealed for public interest. Judge recently ruled in our favor. So I guess here come the docs. And the apparent cover-up was once again worse than imagined. Sandberg.
Wow, this is really bad. I'll post my prior thread in a second. Just making my way through it. Yellow highlights are mine.
Here is the thread of the judge's ruling to unseal on Jan 11th, I sort of forgot about it with everything else. We're a party to the case since we filed to unseal. Docs must have started posting in the last few hours.
Here is the previous reporting and thread on the case if you need background from last March. I'm reminded now that the CFO is also mentioned in the full fraud complaint that was added. I assume that will also be unsealed at some point.
and here was our filing to ask the Judge to unseal the docs. This isn't the first time unsealed Facebook docs showed a metrics cover-up. @RepJerryNadler@davidcicilline asked about their bogus video metrics at their antitrust hearing with Zuckerberg.
Here are the key pages in terms of the fraud complaint. they're all from the plaintiff's previously redacted opposition to Facebook's attempt to dismiss the case. Email me if you want full copy as we pulled off docket. Always a lesson in how FB acts when they caught on stuff.
as background, my interpretation is what was unsealed here ⬆️ was stuff Facebook and plaintiff no longer contest (Judge was very clear). It had to be filed by Friday. There was other stuff on the list Judge will need to rule on, probably also against FB. plus more docs no doubt.
Here is the full report in Financial Times for anyone who enters the thread and misses it. It's the key thing to read here. ft.com/content/c144b3…
Always interesting to go back and see what Facebook worked for years to keep sealed. "trade secrets"....lol 1/4
Always interesting to go back and see what Facebook worked for years to keep sealed. "trade secrets"....lol 2/4
Always interesting to go back and see what Facebook worked for years to keep sealed. "trade secrets"....lol 3/4
Always interesting to go back and see what Facebook worked for years to keep sealed. "trade secrets"....lol 4/4
Another unsealed document posted to docket including more discovery in a deposition request. <thread>
I think I've pinned down all the analysts, academics and lobbyists who are on Team Facebook and Google. They keep sharing each other's material yelling "Link tax!" "Murdoch!" "Traffic!" over and over without seeking to correct their own loaded analysis to reality..
🤦🏽♀️ too many people aren’t up to speed on Australia and repeating each other’s bad takes. notion a tax would be a better solution than a mandatory bargaining code is a bad take if you care about capitalism, news integrity, journalism and avoiding friction of regulated business.
The new law moving forward is super important to small and medium sized news in Australia and instructional to the globe. The number of mistakes I keep seeing and hearing in hot takes are off the charts.
!!! more Facebook docs posted - including plaintiff's request for deposition of Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg. The Judge ordered the material in yellow to be unsealed after Facebook lost a long battle to keep docs redacted. 1/3
Ridiculous amount of redactions on this page. Now unsealed. Again, this is plaintiff's letter but it does include discovery on PR plan regarding inflated potential reach, SUMA (FB term for duplicate accounts), fake accounts and an apparent reversing of course by Sandberg. 2/3
Final page, again yellow is what Judge ordered unsealed. Claim that (now departed) VP under Sandberg didn't have any recollection of conversations...hence need to ask Sandberg questions who they say has 1st-hand knowledge. Get in line behind @AGKarlRacine among others. 3/3
“Content-moderation decisions are momentous, but they are as momentous as they are because of Facebook’s engineering decisions and other choices that determine which speech proliferates on the platform, how quickly it spreads, which users see it, and in what context they see it.”
“It would also let Facebook off the hook for business practices that cause significant harm to democracy.”
Once again. Facebook (and Google) relies on and collects a majority of its data from *when you’re on products they don’t control and you’re not intending to interact with them.* That’s why they fear iOS privacy changes, data protection (aka privacy) laws & antitrust scrutiny. /1
The idea that they’re defending journalism, small biz or that, enforced equally, this will only make Google and Facebook stronger is complete garbage. In fact, if focused on the companies doing the most tracking, it will return value to people’s preferred news and services. /2
Included in BS is a certain analyst who argues there’s some higher-level privacy offered b/c Facebook (and Google) ingest this otherwise useless data and use their tech to protect it from other parties. That’s literally the source of their power and dominant $250B+ ad empires. /3
Facebook CEO Zuckerberg has spent his weekend on calls with Australian govt stemming from their significant antitrust investigation of past 2yrs now leading to a new law expected to pass next week. If you want to know the soft spot on Facebook’s belly.
And if you believe Google and Facebook have leverage because of their supposed threats to leave Australia, I have a bridge to sell you. Committee report shows all parties endorse the new law, they should be full speed ahead to pass next week regardless of G/FB scrambling.
Here is AP on reports of commercial deals. Be warned, Google and Facebook’s lobby can create a swirl when things get super sensitive. Opaque deals are bad. Especially tied narrowly to Google News Showcase product which some say is a crappy product at that. apnews.com/article/techno…
incredibly important to timeline. GOP Senator’s 1st person account which counters Trump’s counsel’s claims of hearsay. And confirm’s Trump’s knowledge of Pence being in danger ten minutes PRIOR to sending tweet attacking Pence for being unwilling to do something unconstitutional.
Extraordinary testimony from GOP member of congress. “He is not a blameless observer, he was rooting for them.” New details about Trump-McCarthy shouting match show Trump refused to call off the rioters cnn.com/2021/02/12/pol…
And here is the statement from another GOP Member of Congress. I don’t know why @RepRaskin hasn’t called them to testify. They are acting with incredible courage 🙏🏽, practically begging others to share their own details and the broader public isn’t aware of any of this.