what a week for Facebook, Attorney General Racine's complaint just posted to the docket with Mark Zuckerberg now added as a defendant. This was widely reported last week but interesting to see (and not see). /1
By "not see," I mean there is a ton of redactions specific to Zuckerberg presumably tied to the limited discovery they've been able to do so far. As part of this, DC will increase its press to depose and do discovery on Zuckerberg, something FTC failed to do. /2
It seems something was more recently discovered that increased their interest in going for the king. /3
A reminder on the case, it involves a cover-up that involved misleading the public, the press and political leaders. None of this is in doubt at this point, it's really a matter of being able to complete discovery and get to the courts vs settle which Facebook will aim to do. /4
The core case in the cover-up was the Cambridge Analytica scandal which the AG complaint reminds involved allowing CA to use the Facebook platform to influence and manipulate the 2016 presidential election despite knowing they had improperly purchased Facebook data. /5
And yes, that data was *sold* to Cambridge Analytica. AG describes it accurately in the complaint. I reiterate this as last night @profcarroll was sharing frustration in the press re-writing history by softening from the term "sale" which I entirely agree is a problem. /6
Here is the AG @AGKarlRacine on CNN last week discussing adding Zuckerberg to the lawsuit. /7
That's all on this one. It also relates to the FTC lawsuit and a few complaints filed in Delaware which were able to get hold of communications between the board and Facebook leadership. More down these threads... /8
And the Senate Commerce "We're not toxic like Facebook" hearing is underway. I'll thread thoughts here but having now read written testimony, Snap uniquely stands out as an "antidote" to the problems being uncovered in Facebook. /1
super interesting data point in Snap's written I don't think I've seen previously...throttling acceleration of velocity+reach for influencers until a human reviews it. "human-reviewed and moderated before it can be viewed by more than 25 people."
Opposite of FB's whitelist. /2
And Sen Blumenthal pops bubble by saying "we're not Facebook" isn't a good bar because that bar is "in the gutter." I do think nuance is important here. Tech and social media aren't de facto bad. There are clear distinctions in Google and Facebook's biz model and market power. /3
Tuesday morning, critically important this week is keeping real and not allowing Facebook to set its own reality and then hack attention with rebrand and event this week. Everything should be in context of the 75+ news reports yesterday on what we’ve learned, the facts. /1
Politico podcast from @birnbaum_e has a corporate comms source describing Facebook as “flailing.” That’s probably more right than wrong with CEO’s rant on earnings suggesting we should want more companies like Facebook and its results for the world. /2 podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pol…
There is a 10am Senate Commerce (same Committee whistleblower testifies) hearing with TikTok, Snap, YouTube execs. Facebook is desperate to reshape issues to be about all social media but the entire hearing and coverage should be in context of differentiating from Facebook. /3
this is a nauseating and embarrassing enthusiastic sales snow job by someone with absolutely zero remaining credibility or trust as a CEO of a major tech company let alone one the one with the greatest impact on global information, civil society and democracy. /1
I'm trying to keep track of his adversaries he's trying to paint and neuter with these prepared remarks:
So far I've logged:
- apple's privacy improvements
- the whistleblower's leaking
- free and plural press "coordinating"
- antitrust enforcers
GTFO with the metaverse. /2
Snap CEO supported Apple's privacy changes. Sheryl Sandberg is about to lay out all of the problems it's causing for the company while not supporting them and instead trying to still hug small business. Every word should be parsed. /3
Took a tour of the web while watching Facebook whistleblower testify (thank you, picture-in-picture). I’m going to post homepages here for the record.
Here are The Atlantic and Washington Post…
Link to UK Parliament hearing - Facebook whistleblower starts momentarily. Chair of committee is @DamianCollins who led multi-party, impressive hearings in 2018/2019 and made himself into one of the smartest lawmakers on the planet regarding the issues. /1 parliamentlive.tv/event/index/cd…
For those who didn’t spend many hours tracking as Parliament DCMS investigated, tried to summons Zuckerberg to answer to cover-up and called them a ‘digital gangsta’, prepare for a session where they’re able to go deeper into dialogue and details rather than talking points. /2
As an example @DamianCollins is already diving into the mechanics of Facebook Groups and how they can amplify problematic engagement and recommend and organize groups and networks of groups around harmful themes. /3
3 things on latest WSJ edition of Facebook Files. (1) Joel Kaplan shouldn’t be anywhere near or have any damn influence on Facebook product design decisions. He is frankly the antithesis of the integrity you want in decisions impacting informing the public and civil society. /1
As an example, and @WillOremus has covered, Twitter specifically does NOT include its policy and public relations people in these decisions. They are reportedly only told the decisions *after* they’ve been made to avoid this exact issue at Facebook. /2
(2) this statement from Breitbart PR, or whatever they have, has to be the most delusional statement they’ve ever made. I just can’t even believe they made it but it’s on brand. /3