“We’ve been fueling this fire for a long time..."
April 18, 2022 12:30 PM Subscribe
As a follow-up to their announcement in November, Gizmodo has released part 1 of the Facebook Papers: "As part of an ongoing project to make these once-confidential records accessible to the general public, Gizmodo is today—for the first time—publishing 28 of the documents previously exclusively shared with Congress and the media."
"The documents will reveal to you, for instance, an internal analysis of the many groups that Facebook knew to be prolific sources of both voter suppression efforts and hate speech targeting its most marginalized users. The records show the company was privately aware of the growing fears among users of being exposed to election-related falsehoods. The papers show that Meta’s own data pinpointed the account of then-President Trump as being principally responsible for a surge in reports concerning violations of its violence and incitement rules."
(previously on the Blue)
"The documents will reveal to you, for instance, an internal analysis of the many groups that Facebook knew to be prolific sources of both voter suppression efforts and hate speech targeting its most marginalized users. The records show the company was privately aware of the growing fears among users of being exposed to election-related falsehoods. The papers show that Meta’s own data pinpointed the account of then-President Trump as being principally responsible for a surge in reports concerning violations of its violence and incitement rules."
(previously on the Blue)
That’s probably the only safe way to exfiltrate data from Facebook’s internal networks.
A few years ago In the Google/Waymo case, Google brought evidence to the court about the exact days and times that one of the people being sued had put a usb stick into their machine and what files had been transferred, six years prior. Nobody throws out logs anymore.
posted by mhoye at 2:39 PM on April 18, 2022 [11 favorites]
A few years ago In the Google/Waymo case, Google brought evidence to the court about the exact days and times that one of the people being sued had put a usb stick into their machine and what files had been transferred, six years prior. Nobody throws out logs anymore.
posted by mhoye at 2:39 PM on April 18, 2022 [11 favorites]
(The scant few stories that manage to sneak out of Apple are like an order of magnitude more draconian than this.)
posted by mhoye at 2:59 PM on April 18, 2022 [2 favorites]
posted by mhoye at 2:59 PM on April 18, 2022 [2 favorites]
Also, this should go without saying but if you work at Facebook you’re complicit in this, should be ashamed of yourself and Facebook and should resign.
posted by mhoye at 3:15 PM on April 18, 2022 [12 favorites]
posted by mhoye at 3:15 PM on April 18, 2022 [12 favorites]
But if everybody who is ashamed of this resigned at once, they’d just have the amoral people. Not sure that is the outcome you want
posted by The River Ivel at 3:26 PM on April 18, 2022 [5 favorites]
posted by The River Ivel at 3:26 PM on April 18, 2022 [5 favorites]
Unless staying somehow checks the amoral people, preventing them from wreaking further havok, all you're doing is providing moral cover for them. Unless you can actually, tangibly assert that you're preventing them from doing worse, you're really just enabling them.
posted by fatbird at 3:40 PM on April 18, 2022 [12 favorites]
posted by fatbird at 3:40 PM on April 18, 2022 [12 favorites]
Not sure that is the outcome you want
I’m sure plenty of facebookers tell themselves that.
posted by mhoye at 4:13 PM on April 18, 2022 [5 favorites]
I’m sure plenty of facebookers tell themselves that.
posted by mhoye at 4:13 PM on April 18, 2022 [5 favorites]
Facebook has like 70,000 employees. The number of employees who even know the details of this issue is probably 1% of the total, and employees who are responsible for making those particular shameful decisions is probably like 0.1%.
Let's focus on effective action to combat the problem rather than derail this thread with hyperbolic sanctimony & blame. I think it will help us all to remember that there is no possible ethical mode of participation in capitalism. Let those who don't knowingly purchase & use electronic devices made by enslaved people cast the first stone, right? Or better yet maybe we can turn our efforts to more useful work than the casting of stones.
Employees feeling ashamed of themselves and resigning does jack shit to correct this issue. Employees speaking up, blowing the whistle, making malfeasance public, forming unions, and striking - that would be much more effective and none of that is possible when they're feeling ashamed of themselves for working for Facebook.
posted by MiraK at 4:51 PM on April 18, 2022 [33 favorites]
Let's focus on effective action to combat the problem rather than derail this thread with hyperbolic sanctimony & blame. I think it will help us all to remember that there is no possible ethical mode of participation in capitalism. Let those who don't knowingly purchase & use electronic devices made by enslaved people cast the first stone, right? Or better yet maybe we can turn our efforts to more useful work than the casting of stones.
Employees feeling ashamed of themselves and resigning does jack shit to correct this issue. Employees speaking up, blowing the whistle, making malfeasance public, forming unions, and striking - that would be much more effective and none of that is possible when they're feeling ashamed of themselves for working for Facebook.
posted by MiraK at 4:51 PM on April 18, 2022 [33 favorites]
Thinking about this from an anonymous employee's comment screenshotted in the article:
I think leaking and whistleblowing has helped on the margins: it's gotten harder for Meta to recruit (for a variety of reasons). In the linked memo, it says, "When we miss our hiring goals, we don't end up building all the things we planned to build, or they move a lot slower. Missing our engineering hiring goals was a big problem, and Mark made it clear he didn't want a repeat performance."
If enough people refuse to build it, it won't get built! The next time a Meta recruiter pesters you, tell them you're not interested in working for a company that can't seem to stop materially contributing to genocide. (What did Oscar Wilde say, one may be regarded as a misfortune; two looks like carelessness?)
So, actually, I think making it socially unacceptable to work for Facebook is...good?
As for unionizing and striking (you don't need to be unionized to strike), here's pretty good explainer about what strikes are protected by the NLRA. I mean, if enough SREs decide to do an illegal strike even if that means Zuck fires them for cause, that would be awesome, but maybe it's okay for them to just quit?
posted by icebergs at 9:10 PM on April 18, 2022 [7 favorites]
"You [CTO Mike Schroepfer] mention the list of things we've changed in the past few years but how are we expected to ignore when leadership overrides research based policy decisions [in order] to better serve people like the groups inciting violence today [Jan 6]. Rank and file workers have done their part to identify changes to improve our platform but have been actively held back"I don't think employees speaking up has been effective.
I think leaking and whistleblowing has helped on the margins: it's gotten harder for Meta to recruit (for a variety of reasons). In the linked memo, it says, "When we miss our hiring goals, we don't end up building all the things we planned to build, or they move a lot slower. Missing our engineering hiring goals was a big problem, and Mark made it clear he didn't want a repeat performance."
If enough people refuse to build it, it won't get built! The next time a Meta recruiter pesters you, tell them you're not interested in working for a company that can't seem to stop materially contributing to genocide. (What did Oscar Wilde say, one may be regarded as a misfortune; two looks like carelessness?)
So, actually, I think making it socially unacceptable to work for Facebook is...good?
As for unionizing and striking (you don't need to be unionized to strike), here's pretty good explainer about what strikes are protected by the NLRA. I mean, if enough SREs decide to do an illegal strike even if that means Zuck fires them for cause, that would be awesome, but maybe it's okay for them to just quit?
posted by icebergs at 9:10 PM on April 18, 2022 [7 favorites]
I am not an Arendt scholar, but after reading this post I was reminded of "the banality of evil." Perusing more of her theory I came across this quote about modernity, here, "It is the age when totalitarian forms of government, such as Nazism and Stalinism, have emerged as a result of the institutionalization of terror and violence. It is the age where history as a “natural process” has replaced history as a fabric of actions and events, where homogeneity and conformity have replaced plurality and freedom, and where isolation and loneliness have eroded human solidarity and all spontaneous forms of living together. Modernity is the age where the past no longer carries any certainty of evaluation, where individuals, having lost their traditional standards and values, must search for new grounds of human community as such."
And that ahistorical "community" is Facebook. Facebook 100% knew exactly what was goin on, was 100% complicit, and had the tools to be able to curb the hate speech that is on their platform. They just prefered to write some weak memos, ignore any dialogue, and shove the cash into their pockets like good corporate bureaucrats.
posted by Word_Salad at 9:16 PM on April 18, 2022 [6 favorites]
And that ahistorical "community" is Facebook. Facebook 100% knew exactly what was goin on, was 100% complicit, and had the tools to be able to curb the hate speech that is on their platform. They just prefered to write some weak memos, ignore any dialogue, and shove the cash into their pockets like good corporate bureaucrats.
posted by Word_Salad at 9:16 PM on April 18, 2022 [6 favorites]
Maybe if enough employees quit it could make a difference. It's very much getting into Arendt level complicity on employee and user ends both.
posted by blue shadows at 9:46 PM on April 18, 2022 [3 favorites]
posted by blue shadows at 9:46 PM on April 18, 2022 [3 favorites]
I mean, if enough SREs decide to do an illegal strike even if that means Zuck fires them for cause, that would be awesome, but maybe it's okay for them to just quit?
Just quitting as individuals does far less than collectively withdrawing labor (whether that be through a strike or through an organized mass resignation). Institutional problems do almost always need collective action/responses.
posted by eviemath at 9:48 PM on April 18, 2022 [3 favorites]
Just quitting as individuals does far less than collectively withdrawing labor (whether that be through a strike or through an organized mass resignation). Institutional problems do almost always need collective action/responses.
posted by eviemath at 9:48 PM on April 18, 2022 [3 favorites]
Employees feeling ashamed of themselves and resigning does jack shit to correct this issue.
So has everything else those employees have done so far, and that "don't forget: Capitalism!" demand for moral purity from your critics was a hell of a tell. You've already been providing a propaganda platform for fascists, dictators and plutocrats, provided tech support for an insurrection, sabotaged the democratic process worldwide and facilitated the occasional genocide for a company that knew it was happening while it was happening, and none of that is hyperbolic sanctimony. Those are the facts on the ground.
What would it take for Facebookers to unionize, or strike, or blow whistles, or anything that would result in meaningful change, that hasn't happened already? Would it have to be worse than that? Do you want to be the person who helped "worse than that" happen? Would that be what it takes for you to find it in yourself to mill around outside and maybe chant some slogans for a while before going back inside for the free snacks to finish up your quarterly deliverables?
No, you should just quit.
posted by mhoye at 4:47 AM on April 19, 2022 [1 favorite]
So has everything else those employees have done so far, and that "don't forget: Capitalism!" demand for moral purity from your critics was a hell of a tell. You've already been providing a propaganda platform for fascists, dictators and plutocrats, provided tech support for an insurrection, sabotaged the democratic process worldwide and facilitated the occasional genocide for a company that knew it was happening while it was happening, and none of that is hyperbolic sanctimony. Those are the facts on the ground.
What would it take for Facebookers to unionize, or strike, or blow whistles, or anything that would result in meaningful change, that hasn't happened already? Would it have to be worse than that? Do you want to be the person who helped "worse than that" happen? Would that be what it takes for you to find it in yourself to mill around outside and maybe chant some slogans for a while before going back inside for the free snacks to finish up your quarterly deliverables?
No, you should just quit.
posted by mhoye at 4:47 AM on April 19, 2022 [1 favorite]
That much anger and vehemence, mhoye, and you’re okay with the people who helped facilitate such harms simply walking away and moving on with their lives? ‘Cause that’s what “just” quitting, individuallly, means. Surely we can ask for a bit more.
Again, the issue is that there is a large institutional problem. The folks arguing against you aren’t saying that the status quo is okay, they are saying that institutional problems need collective solutions - that “just” individual action has negligible effect. Maybe you disagree with that analysis! However, please give your interlocutors the respect of addressing the actual argument rather than merely repeating yourself.
(* Myself, I think the effectiveness - as well as the moral or ethical necessity or implications - of mere individual action varies situationally, and that I don’t yet know enough to have an opinion on that latter piece in this case, but that Facebook is a large and powerful enough behemoth that uncoordinated individual action isn’t going to affect its operations.)
posted by eviemath at 5:56 AM on April 19, 2022 [1 favorite]
Again, the issue is that there is a large institutional problem. The folks arguing against you aren’t saying that the status quo is okay, they are saying that institutional problems need collective solutions - that “just” individual action has negligible effect. Maybe you disagree with that analysis! However, please give your interlocutors the respect of addressing the actual argument rather than merely repeating yourself.
(* Myself, I think the effectiveness - as well as the moral or ethical necessity or implications - of mere individual action varies situationally, and that I don’t yet know enough to have an opinion on that latter piece in this case, but that Facebook is a large and powerful enough behemoth that uncoordinated individual action isn’t going to affect its operations.)
posted by eviemath at 5:56 AM on April 19, 2022 [1 favorite]
Well, definitely quit using fascbook anyway. More people can do that than can quit working there and it affects their bottom line more directly.
posted by hypnogogue at 6:11 AM on April 19, 2022 [2 favorites]
posted by hypnogogue at 6:11 AM on April 19, 2022 [2 favorites]
But how will I unfollow people from highschool whom I dislike but wish to keep in my ranks to bolster the numbers?
posted by BlunderingArtist at 6:48 AM on April 19, 2022 [1 favorite]
posted by BlunderingArtist at 6:48 AM on April 19, 2022 [1 favorite]
Does Facebook keep information like these revelations secret because they don't want individuals to quit working for them or using the platform, or because they don't want the kind of outrage that would motivate Congress to regulate them? Or, since it's doubtless both, which of those outcomes does Facebook probably think is more likely to affect the way they do business?
posted by Gelatin at 7:33 AM on April 19, 2022
posted by Gelatin at 7:33 AM on April 19, 2022
But if everybody who is ashamed of this resigned at once, they’d just have the amoral people. Not sure that is the outcome you want
/s, I'm sure
posted by ryanrs at 7:58 AM on April 19, 2022
/s, I'm sure
posted by ryanrs at 7:58 AM on April 19, 2022
Does Facebook keep information like these revelations secret because they don't want individuals to quit working for them or using the platform, or because they don't want the kind of outrage that would motivate Congress to regulate them?
As you say, it's almost certainly both. But also keep in mind that Facebook is a giant multinational corporation.
It's not just regulation by the US Congress that they need to worry about, but also regulation by all the other countries in which they do business or have a significant presence. Some of which are probably tougher nuts to crack (read: bribe) than Congress. Although most of FB's income probably comes from advertising in the US, their biggest source of users is India, by a huge margin (320 million vs. 190 million in the US). Impeding their revenue growth overseas may actually be the most effective way of getting their attention and changing corporate behavior. Their shareholders want to see STONK GO UP, and one way to keep that from happening would be regulation in emerging markets.
As for their US employees, I'm not really in the business of criticizing what people do for a living within the capitalist system, and the ugly end result is comfortably remote. Especially when it's not clear that Facebook is necessarily that much worse than the other FAANGs. Apple runs (through convenient intermediaries like Foxconn) what are basically suicide factories in China, which they keep in operation through continuous fellating of the Communist Party. Amazon... lol. Netflix? I guess they haven't actively fomented genocide lately, although I'm not at all convinced they wouldn't if it would make the share price go up. Google? The company that literally had to walk back "don't be evil" as a slogan, because it was causing too much cognitive dissonance with their day-to-day business operations? Hmm. I'm not sure the problem is limited to Facebook.
I mean, I'm all for Facebook employees quitting. Data scientists are expensive, yo. I could use a bunch more. We don't pay San Fran FAANG money, though. How do you feel about, uh... St Louis? Pittsburgh? (The weather's just like San Francisco, only... colder. But hey, you're already used to not seeing the sky for nine months of the year, right? What's a little snow here and there? Also, french fries on salad. You'll love it.)
There aren't a lot of morally uncompromised jobs out there. Is Facebook worse than Exxon-Mobil? Nestle? United Fruit? Raytheon? Not everyone is going to be willing to go work at an NGO for less than what Facebook's staff masseuse probably gets. Sure, peel off however many people you can, make it less cool to work there, don't invite them to the cool sex parties or whatever people in SF do. But don't deceive yourself; there are a dozen people waiting for every opening at Facebook. Maybe they'll get slightly worse "talent", but nobody really knows how to define "talent" in the IT space, anyway. (Haha, jk lol. It's being a white guy from one of like 10 schools in the US.)
The job market is not going to fix this.
There's two things that Facebook seems to fear: one is regulation, and you only get that through the messiness of actual politics. Getting some of those angsty Facebookers to contribute some of their lucre to political candidates might be somewhat useful. Hell, they could probably start their own PAC. The second is the creation of viable alternatives to Facebook on the consumer side. Engage people on other platforms. Don't push "quit Facebook!!11"—people who are going to quit, have probably already quit. Show people that there are less toxic, more fun, downright cooler places to spend time online. Systems like Mastodon can't easily be bought like Instagram was. Flickr is still around. Email listservs still exist. We're all still here. Facebook is sticky because of network effects, but there's a tipping point where that works in favor of other platforms, too. If you have the capability and pull to get an organization (or just your friend group) to use something other than Facebook, great. Attack on all levels.
posted by Kadin2048 at 12:29 PM on April 19, 2022 [2 favorites]
As you say, it's almost certainly both. But also keep in mind that Facebook is a giant multinational corporation.
It's not just regulation by the US Congress that they need to worry about, but also regulation by all the other countries in which they do business or have a significant presence. Some of which are probably tougher nuts to crack (read: bribe) than Congress. Although most of FB's income probably comes from advertising in the US, their biggest source of users is India, by a huge margin (320 million vs. 190 million in the US). Impeding their revenue growth overseas may actually be the most effective way of getting their attention and changing corporate behavior. Their shareholders want to see STONK GO UP, and one way to keep that from happening would be regulation in emerging markets.
As for their US employees, I'm not really in the business of criticizing what people do for a living within the capitalist system, and the ugly end result is comfortably remote. Especially when it's not clear that Facebook is necessarily that much worse than the other FAANGs. Apple runs (through convenient intermediaries like Foxconn) what are basically suicide factories in China, which they keep in operation through continuous fellating of the Communist Party. Amazon... lol. Netflix? I guess they haven't actively fomented genocide lately, although I'm not at all convinced they wouldn't if it would make the share price go up. Google? The company that literally had to walk back "don't be evil" as a slogan, because it was causing too much cognitive dissonance with their day-to-day business operations? Hmm. I'm not sure the problem is limited to Facebook.
I mean, I'm all for Facebook employees quitting. Data scientists are expensive, yo. I could use a bunch more. We don't pay San Fran FAANG money, though. How do you feel about, uh... St Louis? Pittsburgh? (The weather's just like San Francisco, only... colder. But hey, you're already used to not seeing the sky for nine months of the year, right? What's a little snow here and there? Also, french fries on salad. You'll love it.)
There aren't a lot of morally uncompromised jobs out there. Is Facebook worse than Exxon-Mobil? Nestle? United Fruit? Raytheon? Not everyone is going to be willing to go work at an NGO for less than what Facebook's staff masseuse probably gets. Sure, peel off however many people you can, make it less cool to work there, don't invite them to the cool sex parties or whatever people in SF do. But don't deceive yourself; there are a dozen people waiting for every opening at Facebook. Maybe they'll get slightly worse "talent", but nobody really knows how to define "talent" in the IT space, anyway. (Haha, jk lol. It's being a white guy from one of like 10 schools in the US.)
The job market is not going to fix this.
There's two things that Facebook seems to fear: one is regulation, and you only get that through the messiness of actual politics. Getting some of those angsty Facebookers to contribute some of their lucre to political candidates might be somewhat useful. Hell, they could probably start their own PAC. The second is the creation of viable alternatives to Facebook on the consumer side. Engage people on other platforms. Don't push "quit Facebook!!11"—people who are going to quit, have probably already quit. Show people that there are less toxic, more fun, downright cooler places to spend time online. Systems like Mastodon can't easily be bought like Instagram was. Flickr is still around. Email listservs still exist. We're all still here. Facebook is sticky because of network effects, but there's a tipping point where that works in favor of other platforms, too. If you have the capability and pull to get an organization (or just your friend group) to use something other than Facebook, great. Attack on all levels.
posted by Kadin2048 at 12:29 PM on April 19, 2022 [2 favorites]
Tangentially related:
Report: Facebook’s Sheryl Sandberg Killed News About Bobby Kotick’s Restraining Order (Kotaku)
Meta’s Sheryl Sandberg Pressured Daily Mail to Drop Bobby Kotick Reporting (Wall Street Journal, subscription or workaround needed to read article)
posted by The Pluto Gangsta at 9:12 AM on April 22, 2022
Report: Facebook’s Sheryl Sandberg Killed News About Bobby Kotick’s Restraining Order (Kotaku)
Meta’s Sheryl Sandberg Pressured Daily Mail to Drop Bobby Kotick Reporting (Wall Street Journal, subscription or workaround needed to read article)
posted by The Pluto Gangsta at 9:12 AM on April 22, 2022
In case anyone's still following, Part 2 of the Facebook Papers have been released.
posted by The Pluto Gangsta at 9:37 AM on May 2, 2022 [1 favorite]
posted by The Pluto Gangsta at 9:37 AM on May 2, 2022 [1 favorite]
« Older I spy, with my little eye, a winged horse | The 2022 Ignyte Awards Shortlist Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by scolbath at 2:13 PM on April 18, 2022 [2 favorites]