!!! As I mentioned last week, ND Cal court ordered unsealing of motion to compel Sheryl Sandberg and Mark Zuckerberg for discovery in their cover-up of Cambridge Analytica which broke wide open March 2018. Yellow was just unsealed - compare to Zuckerberg's testimony to @AOC. /1
This matters as it's long been expected much of Zuckerberg's messages on the matter happened directly with Sandberg or offline. It's an entirely rational practice to keep the CEO off the messy emails. Hence the need for discovery and depositions of Zuckerberg and Sandberg. /2
Meanwhile, Facebook:
- paid $5B to FTC to avoid depositions of leadership;
- negotiated questions off-limits the one time Sandberg testified;
- denied and deflected Parliaments attempts to get answers;
- so far, has avoided discovery and depositions of leadership by AG of DC. /3
Speaking of Sandberg, there is one bit that was unsealed next to a number of redactions left in place. The filing indicates that her files demonstrate that Cambridge Analytica was "merely the tip of the iceberg" which has always been the point of the case and cover-up. /4
This section was left sealed as Facebook claimed it was "confidential communication with consultants." Must be nice having that sort of latitude to avoid embarrassment who helped you with your cover-up. /5
More here in yellow, this just further confirms Sheryl Sandberg's role and importance of these lawsuits continuing to proceed forward in depositions and discovery. A reminder we also just learned there is a sealed transcript of a deposition of Mark Zuckerberg by the SEC. /6
If you want to review the full thread on the cover-up, I put it together last March as a reference to the inconsistencies and deflections in what should have been simple questions and answers at a time when Facebook promised it would come clean. /7
There were three other motions unsealed in the process (and a number of items left redacted per a last minute request by Facebook). This includes a motion regarding Facebook's APIs, their "business partners" and a still delayed look at their promised audit post-Cambridge. /8
There are a few companies left redacted. You can kind of figure out why later on in this breakdown. It looks like the car companies remain sealed as Facebook argued it could hurt their business relationships if the public knew they had much of our data. /10
Side note, there are a bunch of sentences unsealed that just confirm the obvious that Facebook has/had data partners and they're called "data brokers" and allegedly they both sent and received data from Facebook which is embarrassing for them as they don't "sell" your data. /11
Any engineer or business exec in the data or cloud industry would probably find the unsealed motion regarding APIs to be interesting. It includes some costs, massive data sizes, times, tables to restore from cold to warm, et al. And random things like this in yellow. Yikes. /12
Circling back to this first tweet. The answer to the email could have been: Mark, they laundered tens of millions of our records and used it to help elect Donald Trump including to microtarget suppression ads in key districts and we helped them do it. /13
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
Woah.
Google is effectively trying to buy out the United States by tendering a cashier's check for the claimed max damages from screwing industry with adtech market power abuses. US DOJ's adtech antitrust trial seeking to break them up is months away. 1/4
And then with google's payment, they're trying to get it switched from jury to bench trial. The money is an after thought, what they clearly don't want is a jury of Americans reviewing damning evidence (see Bernanke) which may be harder to appeal leading to structural remedy. 2/4
lol, G. The lawsuit is smart for jury as U.S. explained Google's alleged abuse so Americans understand it by comparing G's market power on all sides to wall street. Hell, Google's own executive made this analogy "if Goldman or Citibank owned the NYSE."
A jury will get this. 3/4
Bam, clock starts. Facebook just filed its reply brief seeking cert from SCOTUS to reverse its early defeat to dismiss a Cambridge Analytica case. This comes 6+ years after Facebook began laundering press using exhaustion and complexity to whitewash facts of the scandal. /1
But let's start with preposterous argument from Facebook's amici allies as it's also Facebook's core argument to SCOTUS. Facebook argues the scandal was already widely known in 2015. So no reason to disclose in its SEC risk factors in 2016 or 2017 (when it was covering it up!) /2
Let's turn to the opposition which has really pinned down the facts over time correcting press mistakes. They call Facebook out directly on their bad argument. One that would require belief that the stock dropped for other reasons in 2018 when it finally became widely known. /3