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

51–60 of 164 posts

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#51

Post by jcomis »

orzig wrote: post #16
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:…

Citation majorly needed on "1B estimated"

They are a cofounder of the dating app "Hinge". No idea where the "1B estimated" comes from at all however.

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#52

Post by falcolas »

ceejayoz wrote: post #48
josephg wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook would fight tooth and nail to get those documents removed if they show up on GitHub. They’d win, too - since they own copyright.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/107 > Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting , teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of co…

Fair use is a positive defense though, so you'd have to go through a trial (assumption being Facebook throws enough lawyers at it to make it impossible for a "it's obviously fair use" argument work) to assert it.

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#53

Post by initplus »

ceejayoz wrote: post #37
BitwiseFool wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

I understand why Zuckerberg had coaching and preparation before his appearance - because he has the backing of a megacorporation.

It's interesting to speculate on who is supporting the FB whistleblower's campaign.

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#54

Post by amelius »

adolph wrote: post #30
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.

As opposed to alternative truths.

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#55

Post by lukasb »

whatshisface wrote: post #10

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

My guess is they're using the same strategy as the Snowden leaks - drop a new bombshell at regular intervals through the media, then eventually open source the whole thing. The idea is the maximize the impact of the leaks, not to hide anything (of course, you can disagree about whether it actually does maximize the impact.)

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#56

Post by micromacrofoot »

BitwiseFool wrote: post #20
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:…

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…

You said it yourself; her credentials are impeccable... she's intelligent, wealthy, and experienced. She has been working in SV for over a decade, and has been working on presenting this information with a non-profit law firm that supports whistleblowers since this spring.

Is it so hard to believe that a capable person is trying to do the right thing? I've seen plenty of well composed intelligent people testify to congress.

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#57

Post by travoc »

whatshisface wrote: post #10

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

Snippets of the source documents are presented in the WSJ Facebook stories that preceded the naming of the whistleblower. They are paywalled here, but you might be able to find the stories on certain archive sites.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-facebook-files-11631713039

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#58

Post by DeRock »

keewee7 wrote: post #49
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...

She founded Hinge that was bought by Match Group for $2 billion. Update: There is no verifiable information about her stake in the company.

There is no reality in which she had a 50% stake in hinge at the time of sale. I would be shocked if she had >1%. She was involved only in the very early stages.

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#59

Post by compscistd »

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…

It’s a rather unconvincing but mean way to discount someone. If anything, FB saying how unrelated she is to these problems absolves her of being a part of it. Focus on the documents.

Despite that, not everyone has the will to connect these dots.

Re: Facebook’s attempt to smear the whistleblower

#60

Post by ceejayoz »

initplus wrote: post #53
ceejayoz wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

I understand why Zuckerberg had coaching and preparation before his appearance - because he has the backing of a megacorporation. It's interesting to speculate on who is supporting the FB whistleblower's campaign.

Any high-profile whistleblower is going to have a legal team supporting them with hearing prep, especially if they're fairly well off financially.
Post reply on HN