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
Remarkable exchange between MP @MrJohnNicolson as he mashes with Facebook whistleblower on whether the company is “negligent,” “evil,” or “malevolent.” /4
I really like @DamianCollins follow-up here. It’s where an area where I feel pretty strongly and Facebook lost the most trust with me. Trust is earned based on how you act at a point of vulnerability. Once you know something harmful is happening, how did you deal with it? /5
I wasn’t expecting this line of discussion but 🙌🏼 it’s as if the Facebook whistleblower was a fly on the wall when I had direct access to Facebook and they failed to listen. /6
Good perspective why it’s not sustainable the only group that can ask questions and get answers from Facebook is Facebook itself. It’s important context we just learned from unsealed docs in lawsuit FB terminated PWC’s audit initiated by board after Cambridge Analytica breach. /7
wicked smart question as @DamianCollins connects dots between microtargeted amplification for advertising $$$ / profits and the microtargeted spread of harmful content. Yes, advertisers $100+B per year funds same systems that also spread harm. Profit > Civil society. /8
And @DamianCollins fact checks Facebook PR Nick Clegg’s silly misleading “two to tango” blog post putting blame of the users to accurately represent Facebook’s integral role in providing accelerated velocity and reach for harmful content. /9
In a sane world, this would freak investors on earnings day. Towards close of hearing we get to “Enron” discussion. First, whistleblower clearly points out the extraordinary percentage of new accounts which aren’t authentic (Facebook plays “denominator game” here, too). /10
And @DamianCollins rightly inquires why the ad sales wouldn’t be fraudulent. Whistleblower points to SUMA (actually means Single User Multiple Accounts based on evidence we helped unseal) and yes there is an active fraud lawsuit involving c-level. Will post thread below. /11
Here is a thread on SUMA, fake accounts, “potential reach” and advertising sales concerns and allegations including FT and WSJ reporting on them. /12
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
Super smart, important read in Washington Post for regulators, media executives, lawmakers. At a high level, Meta continues to use its market power to suppress all value in brands, news orgs and media companies. Brands are proxies for trust, but profit and data to Meta. /1
“These are platforms doing what platforms do, which is trying to optimize the time spent and the data collected. They don’t really have much interest or care for what happens to news outlets or journalists,” said @emilybell. /2
@emilybell But what is interesting here that needs to be pursued. How will Canada react considering they have a code that seeks to curb this imbalance in bargaining power. Facebook is attempting to run over to prevent further spread dismissing it as ineffective law. They’re wrong. /3