"We have to prepare for the worst here." - VP, ad chief
"I think there is a real chance this is a very bad moment for us" - VP
"how long can we get away with the reach overestimation?"
"This is a lawsuit waiting to happen." /1
These are statements in "Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only" evidence unsealed in a Facebook fraud case over weekend. In Feb, FB had framed the complaint to press as "cherry-picked" but we can now see full threads including Facebook COO, CFO, and half-dozen senior VPs. /2
Quick explainer (1 of 3): Measurement issues were an ongoing issue according to COO Sandberg to CFO Wehner. And an analyst had now noted Facebook's projected numbers in its advertising planning tools were even larger than actual people (using the US census). /2
Quick explainer (2 of 3): This was especially problematic in a moment when Facebook was rolling out a new marketing narrative that was "people-based" to get away from questions around fake accounts, fraud, bots and many of the existing concerns when buying from Facebook. /3
Quick explainer (3 of 3): My org, @DCNorg, had filed with court more than a year ago to unseal the evidence. We had prior experience with cover-ups by FB and found it easily in public's interest to see the full context of what were now fraud claims against the market leader. /4
This proved out. For example, exhibit 16 is an entire thread of top Facebook execs preparing for their Q3 2017 earnings call. In it, they discuss not informing their investors on the call, the real impact to market from discrepancies, and how to spin the issues publicly. /5
Facebook likes to claim these issues didn't impact billing of clients as they don't serve ads to these users.
The red box is written by VP ad chief, Carolyn Everson, as she sounds red alarm. ("SUMA" is internal parlance for a single user with multiple accounts).
You be judge. /6
Remarkably, as execs scrambled ahead of earnings, CFO "Dave" meeting had decided they wouldn't include it in their prepared remarks. Their rationale being it was an advertising issue but not a business risk (despite involving the planning tool for 97% of their revenues). /7
Rob Goldman confirms the red alarm here (and throws in a side tidbit about Russia Today).
Again, the alarm is this would have impacted budgets and planning (ergo, everyone else in the market - publishers, advertisers, investors) and the two top ad execs are confirming it. /8
We also see their now-familiar PR strategy of using dominance to coach ad client advocates, propping up small business impact ("cover your melon!"). (note: XFN is their internal team for metrics-related issues - a key group for hacking growth and profits) /9
The key remaining redactions in email threads are addresses (irony considering Facebook's ongoing breach of 500+ million phone numbers and emails but I digress): Sandberg, COO
Everson, VP
Olivan, VP
Rose, VP
Goldman, VP
Fischer, VP
Vora, VP
Wehner, CFO /10
Here is what is now known as "exhibit 16" (one of 75) if you want to fully review with your own eyes. You can decide if it's cherry-picked or if these are mid-level employees.
Nope, it's another cover-up from putting growth ahead of integrity. /11 …d-40e9-822b-081bc894b6af.filesusr.com/ugd/372b91_40f…
Finally, here is my other thread from last night that took off and has other links as background. I decided to write a new thread hoping it would further clarify a few things. Cheers. /12
more news yesterday in flurry of activity in lawsuit vs Facebook for (over)paying FTC $5B to protect Zuckerberg. Big names involved. Board records inspection shows who's who in 'approval' - everyone now gone except Zuckerberg, Andresseen and Alford. Gets interesting quickly... /1
Yes, Andreessen joined Thiel in politics with full-throated endorsement of Trump with close allies. Alford was CFO of Chan Zuckerberg right before approval. WSJ reported Chenault and Zients (important: now Biden's chief of staff) stepped down over disagreements with Mark Z. /2
So what's happening. Well, first in April 2024 all of these prior and current board members were served in the lawsuit. Again, this is based on a prior records inspection of non-privileged board documents and the Court at that point deciding to allow the case to move forward. /3
Friday night KA-boom. In adtech antitrust lawsuit against Google, court has ordered the state AGs may depose Google co-founder Sergey Brin and CEO Sundar Pichai. Huge. /1
So the two cited reasons Pichai will be deposed (although not all of them) are incredibly sensitive. 1), “Jedi Blue,” the alleged collusion with Facebook that everyone wrongly wrote off back earlier in this lawsuit. Google CEO Pichai met directly with Facebook CEO Zuckerberg. /2
A reminder the Google and Facebook deal (aka the “NBA” or “Jedi Blue”) is also in a private antitrust suit against Facebook. The deal was signed by the lieutenants of the CEOs (Sheryl Sandberg for Facebook). /3
US v Google flooded docket (103 filings!) over weekend as Court said Friday...hey now, let's skip summary judgment, this baby is going to trial. Much is companies trying to keep their secrets sealed but we get a sense for the witnesses. And a small taste of evidence to come. /1
On the companies filing to keep their secrets sealed which they mostly provided under subpoena, it's a mix of adtech, agencies, platforms, you name it. /2
We also learn some glossary items which likely come up:
'RASTA' - Google's tool to evaluate new 'launches' (aka changes) in ad serving system, runs on live traffic
'Ariane' - identifies and summarized launches
'Launch' - creative name (lol), it replaced Ariane in 2020/2021 /3
SCOTUS just posted order list. It granted cert to Facebook on its Cambridge Analytica matter. Only first question but that’s a huge one. Basically should Facebook have disclosed to shareholders what it started to cover up in 2015 rather than presenting risk as hypothetical? /1
Here is the actual first question as written. One immediate item, it’s outrageous if Justice Kavanaugh didn’t/doesn’t recuse seeing his reported best friend, Joel Kaplan, was directly involved in the matter and its cover up. He threw his SCOTUS confirmation party IIRC. /2
Here is a link into background. I strongly urge press not to overlook this or assume you know fact history. Over the years much has played out in coverup and much of the reporting has been bent towards Facebook’s spin. I am more than happy to point you to the court records. /3
“X has lost dozens of major advertisers under Musk’s ownership, with 74 out of the top 100 U.S. advertisers from that month no longer spending on the platform as of May.” 1/4
Smart NBC report focusing on amplification, velocity and reach, “X isn’t living up to its own policies when it allows violent extremists to use the platform’s amplification features.” 2/4
“It’s not clear to what extent people at X were aware that the company was monetizing the extremist hashtags prior to NBC News’ reporting.” 3/4
Let’s do this. As I’ve said in the past, nothing makes a statement on important news close to the newspaper front page. Across America, almost every editor went with the simple fact, “Guilty.”
Let’s start with the biggest circulation. /1
I shouldn’t overlook Chicago and Los Angeles, Same. /2
Now let’s drop down to Florida for maybe obvious reasons to see how they reported it… /3