Facebook Whistleblower Is Leftist Activist Repped By Lawyer For ‘Whistleblower’ Behind Trump Impeachment

The Facebook whistleblower, Frances Haugen, has a record of donations to far-left Democrats and a history of raising issues about purported bias while at previous employers, a Daily Wire review found. She is working with Democrat operatives to roll out her complaint and has the same lawyers as the anonymous Ukraine “whistleblower” whose allegations led to Donald Trump’s impeachment, but who reportedly turned out to be then-Vice President Joe Biden’s top advisor on the country.

Share

Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp Outage

Facebook Is Having a Very, VERY Bad Day (Cue World’s Tiniest Violin)

As of publishing time, Facebook has been down for several hours, along with WhatsApp, Instagram, Messenger, and Oculus VR. But that’s just the beginning. The social media behemoth’s stock prices also crashed on Monday, making the company’s already bad day even worse. The plummet in stock prices came as a Facebook executive was on CNBC defending the company against claims by a whistleblower that the company prioritized profit over the safety of young Facebook users.

Share

Frances Haugen: Facebook whistleblower reveals identity

A former Facebook whistleblower responsible for a series of bombshell leaks has revealed her identity.

Frances Haugen, 37, who worked as a product manager on the civic integrity team at Facebook, was interviewed on Sunday by CBS.

She said the documents she leaked proved that Facebook repeatedly prioritised “growth over safety”.

Facebook said the leaks were misleading and glossed over positive research conducted by the company.

Share

DeSantis directs Florida Secretary of State to investigate Facebook for election interference

Share

Facebook Files: 5 things leaked documents reveal

This week, Facebook has faced a series of accusations about its internal workings, based on revelations in the Wall Street Journal and elsewhere.

Much of the information comes from Facebook’s own internal documents, suggesting the company now has some whistle-blowers in its ranks.

The documents will provide governments and regulators with plenty to pore over as they consider their next moves.

However, Facebook has defended itself against all the accusations.

Share

Facebook ‘overpaid in data settlement to avoid naming Zuckerberg’

Facebook paid $4.9bn more than necessary to the US Federal Trade Commission in a settlement over the Cambridge Analytica scandal in order to protect Mark Zuckerberg, a lawsuit has claimed.

The lawsuit alleges that the size of the $5bn settlement was driven by a desire to protect Facebook’s founder and chief executive from being named in the FTC complaint.

Facebook was fined by the FTC in 2019 for “deceiving” users about its ability to keep personal information private, after a year-long investigation into the Cambridge Analytica data breach, where a UK analysis firm harvested millions of Facebook profiles of US voters.

Share

Facebook is starting to share more about what it demotes in News Feed

The way that Facebook controls its News Feed is often controversial and largely opaque to the outside world.

Now the social network is attempting to shine more light on the content it suppresses but doesn’t remove entirely. On Thursday, Facebook published its “Content Distribution Guidelines” detailing the roughly three-dozen types of posts it demotes for various reasons in the News Feed, like clickbait and posts by repeat policy offenders. That process, which relies heavily on machine learning technology to automatically detect problematic content, effectively throttles the reach of offending posts and comments without the author knowing.

Share

Facebook exempts secret ‘whitelisted’ elite from its rules allowing them to post banned content with special XCheck program

Facebook’s oversight board is reviewing the company’s practice of exempting secret ‘whitelisted’ users from its community guidelines and allowing them to post banned content through a special XCheck program.

XCheck, also known internally as cross-check, has been a long-time subject of Facebook’s oversight board – a body not affiliated with the social media giant hired to critique how Facebook handles problematic content.

The board was created last year with a $130million trust fund from Facebook, which allows the committee to make final decisions on whether individual pieces of content can remain on the site.

Share

Texas Governor Signs Law Preventing Social Media Companies From Banning People For Their Views

The law, known as HB 20, prohibits social media platforms from banning or suspending users, and removing or suppressing their content, based on political viewpoint. The bill was introduced by state Sen. Bryan Hughes partly in an effort to combat perceived censorship of conservatives by Facebook, Twitter, Google-owned YouTube, and other major tech companies.

Share

COVID Researcher Sues Biden, Facebook, Twitter for Colluding to Censor Speech

The complaint, dated Aug. 31, alleged that the federal government “admits to conspiring with social media companies to censor messages with which it disagrees.”

The lawsuit argued that this viewpoint discrimination, in which the federal government directs Big Tech companies to censor views that challenge a certain narrative, violated the First Amendment.

Share

Facebook reported to secretly be building an election “misinformation” censorship board

Forming an “election commission” to oversee a fair and smooth election process, until recently, used to be something exclusively reserved for nation states, but now Facebook is reported to be meddling in that domain, at least semantics-wise.

Share

Why Facebook hid its ‘Transparency Report’

The company is embarrassed by the most popular shared content on its site

“Transparency is an important part of everything we do at Facebook.” So begins the company’s first ever ‘Transparency Report’, covering Q1 2021, which details the most viewed posts, pages and shared links on the network.

Except when Facebook executives saw that the most shared link was a Chicago Tribune story about a doctor dying of a mysterious internal bleeding condition two weeks after his Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine, they panicked. It was a credible mainstream source, but the article asserted that it was “possibly the nation’s first death linked to the vaccine”. Clearly, the reason for its popularity was as useful evidence for the anti-vax movement. Would Facebook be accused of spreading “misinformation”?

Share