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
Confession. Having watched Scott Pelley's outstanding work over nearly three decades, I almost didn't take the time to watch his W.F. commencement speech thinking the news reports told me enough of the facts. Frankly, that would have been a huge mistake on my part. Huge. 1/5
Disclosure: I'm a 60 Minutes fan. In fact, I read Don Hewitt's "Tell Me a Story" after nearly a decade in sports media and it likely tipped the scale in 2007 when I decided to jump to work at CBS. I find Pelley and team brilliant in telling stories in barely 15 min segments. 2/5
“If liberty means anything at all, it means telling someone something that they don’t want to hear. I fear there may be some people in the audience who don’t want to hear what I have to say today but I appreciate your forbearance in this small act of liberty.” - Scott Pelley 3/5
wow, another order for Mark Zuckerberg to sit for another court deposition. This time in a case involving privacy violations with ingesting web-wide health data. Remember they paid billions in cases to try to avoid this. Data and privacy issues are especially sensitive. /1
Zuckerberg depositions are interesting as they often go on for hours with highly informed attorneys driving for answers. And those answers may be put up against the often questioned veracity of his answers to Congress. Yes, as a CEO, he has testified to Congress A LOT. /2
I think his first real depo was SEC on very sensitive data scandal leading to $5B+ settlements with FTC+SEC. That scandal is still playing out in courts (did he overpay to protect himself?) It took 3yrs to get unsealed after I caught it in a footnote. /3
The Verge comes in with a massive scoop on the backstory reporting it was Musk - and Sacks - behind the scenes trying to blow up IP to train AI on behalf of his allies. This wouldn't be a surprise to anyone. /1
they have reports and details on the carnage and firing of the leadership and on the possible incorrect assumption that the new people in charge were running their playbook. /2
It may be rare that @mrddmia is in agreement with Dems but in the world of accountability for big tech abuse whether over data, monetization, IP, censorship, privacy, you name it, these aren't partisan issues. appreciate the shared voice from advocates all around. /3
omg. I can't believe what I am seeing in the FTC v Meta exhibits that just posted. This is the start of a long Oct 2018 thread where redacted executive tells another c-level executive, Adam Mosseri, "some estimates fake engagement [on Instagram] could be in range of 40%." /1
and Mosseri does nothing to dispute the data point either. he actually agrees they are a threat saying, "they present a bigger thread [sic] to the business than to the user experience." The timing of this remarkable if you know the context of what was going on there. /2
Earlier in that year, Facebook was using same Mosseri to pitch and spin (this entire pitch document is amazing behind the scenes) the infamous Wired cover story, WSJ, CNN press on work to improve meaningful social interactions, and much much more. /3 ftcvmeta.app.box.com/s/b8m39toze8uc…
woah, I've now read Google and DOJ's proposed remedies for Google's 3rd antitrust defeat (adtech). I threaded Friday's hearing but this full doc is nothing short of beautiful. Best stuff may be missed so hear me out. This is a huge deal - 10yrs, "lifeblood of the Internet." /1
A reminder on the four objectives of antitrust remedies. In court on Friday and in Google's proposal, Google just seems to ignore the third and fourth as if they don't matter. That's a major problem for them. Judge Brinkema will be all over it. She gets this case wonderfully. /2
For instance, on Friday she labeled Google's ad demand, AdWords, the "golden goose." Now here is how DOJ describes it: "unique advertising demand." Notably, they don't flag that the demand also connects back to Google's other illegal monopoly loss for "search text ads." /3
A few more nuggets of delight for you. First, Tim Apple has had his halo bent. He's arguably had the best reputation of the big tech CEOs until today. He ordered the code red. /1
Alex Roman had a super bad day. If anyone directed him on this testimony cited by the Court, heads will roll. either way, Apple Inc also has big problems. /2