Live data from Hacker News

Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

theverge.com

31–40 of 164 posts

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#31
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. you are seeing firsthand Facebook shills trying to discredit her. fuck Facebook and zuck the cuck

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#32

"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.

What a heavily editorialized statement for something that isn't marked as opinion. The whole article reeks of being written by someone who literally hates Facebook.

And the use of the term "God's own truth" feels like a really underhanded and unjustified rhetorical trick. To use a analogy, It feels like they are declaring a winner during the opening argument of the prosecution, before the defense has even had a chance to fully respond: "If Facebook had evidence, it would show it." Doesn't the author realize that kind of counter evidence will come later?

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 w…

Again, I agree with you on this point as well and it's got my spidey-senses tingling like crazy that the whole thing is a work.

I've long been in the ban social media completely camp. It's a tool too dangerous for use by regular people.

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#34
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

[deleted]

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#35
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:…

[deleted]

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#36

Has anyone got the documents themselves, or only reporter's descriptions of the documents?

Yes. At this point in the world we need not take anyone's word for what a corpus says or does not say. Either the data, query, and processing exist and are documented or they may as well be making things up.

Public forkable repo or gtfo.

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#37
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:…

I'm paraphrasing a similar comment I made on a different thread, but this whole situation seems fishy to me... Out of the blue some larger-than-life person (with impeccable credentials, no less) comes out of the woodwork and is lauded with attention while the big news outlets make this massive push against Facebook, all while congress is holding hearings about regulating social media. Then a massive outage happens at…

> Perhaps she's simply a natural, but I sense she received some coaching and preparation beforehand.

So?

Do you think Zuckerberg doesn't get coaching and preparation before his hearing appearances?

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#38
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:…

I'm paraphrasing a similar comment I made on a different thread, but this whole situation seems fishy to me... Out of the blue some larger-than-life person (with impeccable credentials, no less) comes out of the woodwork and is lauded with attention while the big news outlets make this massive push against Facebook, all while congress is holding hearings about regulating social media. Then a massive outage happens at…

I mean it's pretty obvious why they're targeting Facebook and not the other big Internet companies.

Facebook is the only one still allowing far-right speech on their platform. That is why the Democrats are going after them.

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#39
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…

Nice analysis. I'm certainly not suggesting that this is a coordinated campaign by FB without evidence to suggest it, but the net result of these viral news events could be FB getting the regulation that they want.

If one did want to coordinate such a campaign, there's a certain society-wide informational/narrative vulnerability that makes such a campaign potentially attractive:

-You have a public who loves latching onto 'good vs evil', 'david vs goliath' stories, and in this meta-narrative, we the public shall vanquish the evil goliath by any means necessary!

-We also have a public who at large isn't terribly interested in questioning their own biases, thinking through the higher abstract principles at play, thinking through externalities from vanquishing said evil, and in general going against the grain in these 'good vs evil' battles

-You have a news media environment who profits off such engaging meta-narratives and stories, and is more than willing to push these stories out into the public

-The companies and their employees in the news media environment also have their own in-house biases against certain 'villians' such as FB, which further incentives the spread of such stories and meta-narratives. FB has been a competitive threat to media companies. FB has also done or been accused of things which have frustrated media employees of all political persuasions.

FB is a perfect villian in this meta-narrative, regardless of any of the facts at play. They know it too.

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#40
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...

I believe they searched "frances haugen net worth" and then copied from this extremely reputable source: https://primalinformation.com/frances-haugen-wiki-net-worth/
Post reply on HN