Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 164 posts

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#21

Post by dntrkv »

leahbarton wrote: post #14
cpr wrote: post #4

I'm sure what she's saying is only part of the evil that Facebook represents, but there's something fishy about the whole setup. Why is she getting full media coverage and support, when previous whistleblowers were roundly ignored? She's a very wealthy person (1B estimated), so perhaps she's fairly well insulated from any blowback? But again, why is now the time to pile on Facebook, and why this person? [edit] Hint:…

What's your source on her wealth? I'm only finding second hand sources stating up to 5 million...

There is no source because nobody under the C-level is worth anywhere close to that much.

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#22

Post by shadilay »

whatshisface wrote: post #15
cpr wrote: post #4

I'm sure what she's saying is only part of the evil that Facebook represents, but there's something fishy about the whole setup. Why is she getting full media coverage and support, when previous whistleblowers were roundly ignored? She's a very wealthy person (1B estimated), so perhaps she's fairly well insulated from any blowback? But again, why is now the time to pile on Facebook, and why this person? [edit] Hint:…

Here are some points I notice about this whole thing: - Facebook has stated (in the press release the article is reporting on) that they support regulation. This is typical for large market incumbents, who have been said to always support fixed-overhead regulation, because it hurts smaller competitors more than it hurts them. - Washington loves regulating things and can be safely assumed to be pro-policy in most case…

This seems to be a case of tech monopolies usurping power from the traditional power brokers who are now pushing back demanding to be put in charge again.

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#23

Post by gruez »

dntrkv wrote: post #21
leahbarton wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's your source on her wealth? I'm only finding second hand sources stating up to 5 million...

There is no source because nobody under the C-level is worth anywhere close to that much.

maybe 1B is family wealth rather than personal wealth?

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#24

Post by [deleted] »

Hokusai wrote: post #18
whatshisface wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here are some points I notice about this whole thing: - Facebook has stated (in the press release the article is reporting on) that they support regulation. This is typical for large market incumbents, who have been said to always support fixed-overhead regulation, because it hurts smaller competitors more than it hurts them. - Washington loves regulating things and can be safely assumed to be pro-policy in most case…

> The public is not presently pro-regulation I guess that this is true for the USA. But Facebook is a global company and other countries may be more regulation friendly.

[deleted]

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#25

Post by busterarm »

whatshisface wrote: post #15
cpr wrote: post #4

I'm sure what she's saying is only part of the evil that Facebook represents, but there's something fishy about the whole setup. Why is she getting full media coverage and support, when previous whistleblowers were roundly ignored? She's a very wealthy person (1B estimated), so perhaps she's fairly well insulated from any blowback? But again, why is now the time to pile on Facebook, and why this person? [edit] Hint:…

Here are some points I notice about this whole thing: - Facebook has stated (in the press release the article is reporting on) that they support regulation. This is typical for large market incumbents, who have been said to always support fixed-overhead regulation, because it hurts smaller competitors more than it hurts them. - Washington loves regulating things and can be safely assumed to be pro-policy in most case…

100% share your take on the subject.

Additionally, reading the whistleblower's account and her opinions/goals struck me as an incredibly naive way of thinking...although I think she may be genuine (she's my age and I have many peers like her).

What kind of organization respects the value of complete top-down organizational change initiated by rank and file members of the company? Who would think an organization would give them that kind of power? The role that she was hired for seems destined to give her no resources to accomplish the stated goals; we saw something similar but on a much smaller scale with Basecamp.

I know a lot of my peers believe in the power to make sweeping organizational changes like that, but it's "fucking with other peoples' money". To me the whole situation seems like the setup to a bad joke.

Facebook doesn't have to do much to smear her in my eyes because she already strikes me as a ridiculous person. That said, Facebook is similarly ridiculous for hiring people with causes in direct opposition to how they do business and giving everyone in the company unfettered access to damaging internal information.

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#26

Post by shill_cunt »

jaywalk wrote: post #12

It's tough to call Facebook's response a "smear" or "disgusting attempt at character assassination" since it didn't address her character at all. It certainly does attempt to discredit her, and it is cowardly and ultimately doesn't address the issues she brought up. But the author of this article is a bit hyperbolic.

screw Facebook. i hope they are regulated out of existence. stop shilling for them.

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#27

Post by whatshisface »

busterarm wrote: post #25
whatshisface wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here are some points I notice about this whole thing: - Facebook has stated (in the press release the article is reporting on) that they support regulation. This is typical for large market incumbents, who have been said to always support fixed-overhead regulation, because it hurts smaller competitors more than it hurts them. - Washington loves regulating things and can be safely assumed to be pro-policy in most case…

100% share your take on the subject. Additionally, reading the whistleblower's account and her opinions/goals struck me as an incredibly naive way of thinking...although I think she may be genuine (she's my age and I have many peers like her). What kind of organization respects the value of complete top-down organizational change initiated by rank and file members of the company? Who would think an organization would…

Focusing too much on the personality of the whistleblower is in a sense getting sucked into the celebrity drama hole that will always take us away from consideration of the real issue.

In fact, I think being taken away from consideration of the real issue is a major consequence of the way this is being approached: nobody can debate with the obvious truth that teenagers are getting a little too sucked in to the fake world of influencers, and right now we're not discussing it, ironically.

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#28

Post by chalst »

whatshisface wrote: post #11
fireball_blaze wrote: post #2

"If the best Facebook can come up with is this disgusting attempt at character assassination, Haugen is telling God’s own truth. We should listen to her." A pretty powerful closing statement IMHO.

> Facebook PR: “Today a Senate Commerce subcommittee held a hearing with a former product manager at Facebook who worked for the company for less than two years, had no direct reports, never attended a decision-point meeting with C-level executives — and testified more than six times to not working on the subject matter in question.” This doesn't sound like character assassination, it's Facebook claiming that she was…

Character assassination is not done in one press release. It's done in a campaign of PRs and cossetting friendly journalists and newspapers.

Perhaps it's premature to call it character assassination, but we've seen this play out quite a few times.

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#29

Post by [deleted] »

jaywalk wrote: post #12

It's tough to call Facebook's response a "smear" or "disgusting attempt at character assassination" since it didn't address her character at all. It certainly does attempt to discredit her, and it is cowardly and ultimately doesn't address the issues she brought up. But the author of this article is a bit hyperbolic.

[deleted]

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#30

Post by adolph »

fireball_blaze wrote: post #2

"If the best Facebook can come up with is this disgusting attempt at character assassination, Haugen is telling God’s own truth. We should listen to her." A pretty powerful closing statement IMHO.

"telling God’s own truth"

Tremendously convincing.

Post reply on HN