March 15, 2025

Interesting mini-article about _Careless People_, the new book about Facebook (From the WaPo Book Review newsletter)

Pretty gobsmacking article in WaPo Book Review (still sound journos) about _Careless People_, a new book about Facebook:

“Near the end of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s “The Great Gatsby,” Nick says, “They were careless people, Tom and Daisy — they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money.”

“Careless People” is a brilliant title for the new exposé by former Facebook executive Sarah Wynn-Williams.

The book, subtitled “A Cautionary Tale of Power, Greed, and Lost Idealism,” reads like a spicy office memoir if your officemates travel by private jet and your boss asks for a rally of 1 million people. Wynn-Williams recounts her seven years in the social media empire now called Meta. Beginning in 2011, she worked as an adviser to Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg “as they were inventing how the company would deal with governments around the world.”

“It started as a hopeful comedy and ended in darkness and regret,” Wynn-Williams writes. “I watched hopelessly as they sucked up to authoritarian regimes like China’s and casually misled the public.”


Advertisement
Daisy Buchanan, you may remember, hit Myrtle with a car and then let Gatsby take the fall. From what Wynn-Williams describes, it sounds like Facebook ran over millions of Myrtles and then fled the scene to let parents, citizens and governments clean up the mess.

Working at Facebook, she claims, was “like watching a bunch of fourteen-year-olds who’ve been given superpowers and an ungodly amount of money,” but that’s not fair. Fourteen-year-olds would never behave like this.

Wynn-Williams’s tale of how she was allegedly treated by her boss while on maternity leave with life-threatening health problems is appalling.

But her complaints about the company’s reflexive secrecy and deceit are what should trouble the rest of us who still have to deal with the influence of Meta. She alleges, for instance, that senior managers devised “a cover-up” to contradict news reports that Facebook and Instagram allowed advertisers to exploit kids’ darkest insecurities.

Other allegations range from creepy instances of inappropriate behavior to dangerous acts of political interference. Speaking of her bosses, she writes: “They put staff in with the Trump campaign to help them stage the war of misinformation, trolling, and lies that won him the election” in 2016.

ADVERTISEMENT
Advertisement

Another terrifying section claims that Facebook’s “lethal carelessness” allowed the platform to be used to spread hate speech and propaganda that destabilized Myanmar and led to a frenzy of violence that killed 10,000 people (story).

Among Wynn-Williams’s most disturbing allegations is that Zuckerberg eagerly pursued a secret plan to make Facebook more palatable — and more useful! — to China’s repressive regime (story). According to “Careless People,” the plan involved using a Chinese private equity firm to “censor a blacklist of banned content and deliver user data that the Chinese government requested.” That user data would be enhanced with facial recognition technology and photo tagging developed by Facebook to “facilitate Chinese censorship.”

Wynn-Williams expresses her shock in the present tense: “The ugly fact is that these are many of the things Facebook has said are simply impossible when Congress and its own government have asked — on content, data sharing, privacy, censorship, and encryption — and yet its leadership are handing them all to China on a silver platter.”

Zuckerberg, she says, is “aggressively pushing every lever to get in, no matter how dodgy.”

Wynn-Williams writes that even as Facebook was devising this scheme, the company was preparing a contingency PR response. She quotes an internal risk assessment that imagines how the embarrassing news could get out: “A disgruntled current or former employee leaks additional details about how we are treating data to highlight differences in what we say to the public vs what we do.”

ADVERTISEMENT
Advertisement

Now, several years later, here we are reading that very PR nightmare: A disgruntled former employee — Wynn-Williams says she was fired soon after her harassment complaint against chief global affairs officer Joel Kaplan was dismissed — has published a gobsmacking book that purports to highlight differences in what they say to the public vs. what they do.

Meta’s counterassault began even before “Careless People” was released on Tuesday.

Last Friday afternoon, I got my first message from Ryan Daniels, public affairs manager of strategic response at Meta. When I declined his invitation to talk by phone, he wrote back again: “I was wondering if the Washington Post was going to write a review about a book that’s coming out this upcoming week on Meta. Do you have a couple minutes to chat?”

So, I called. Daniels said, “We don’t have the book,” but the company had prepared “preliminary statements” about it. Although he didn’t share those with me, he wrote to me again on Saturday and again on Monday trying to get information about our review plans. (In my 27 years of reviewing and editing newspaper books sections, no company has ever done this with me.)

Meanwhile, other parts of the empire were working from different angles.

On March 7, the same day Daniels first reached out to me, the company filed an “emergency motion” with an arbitrator to silence Wynn-Williams on the grounds that her book violated the terms of a non-disparagement agreement she signed when she left Facebook.

On Wednesday, arbitrator Nicholas Gowen ruled that Wynn-Williams must temporarily stop promoting “Careless People” — “on a book tour or otherwise” — and stop publishing or distributing the book (story).

On social media, Meta communications director Andy Stone quickly celebrated the arbitrator’s decision: “This ruling affirms that Sarah Wynn Williams’ false and defamatory book should never have been published.”

This effort to gag an author comes from a company that decided in January to end its fact-checking program in the U.S. because there was “too much censorship.” Where are those radical free-speech principles now, Mark?

In a statement, Wynn-Williams’s publisher said, “The arbitration order has no impact on Macmillan. However, we are appalled by Meta’s tactics to silence our author through the use of a non-disparagement clause in a severance agreement. To be clear, the arbitrator’s order makes no reference to the claims within ‘Careless People.’ The book went through a thorough editing and vetting process, and we remain committed to publishing important books such as this. We will absolutely continue to support and promote it.”

Yesterday, when I reached out to Daniels for a response from Meta, he wrote back: “Do you plan to write something about it, or are you just curious how we’re responding?”

It’s always about controlling the narrative. But apparently, that’s not going so well. This morning, “Careless People” is No. 3 on Amazon.

I know this is a long item, the longest I’ve ever written for the Book Club newsletter. But when one of the world’s most powerful media companies tries to snuff out a book — amid other alarming attacks on free speech in America like this — it’s time to pull out all the stops.”

February 17, 2025

This Small Rust-Belt City Holds the Secret to Democrats' Latino Woes: Reading, PA, Latinos

Latino voters shifted dramatically toward Trump in the last election. Reading, Pennsylvania offers a clue to how Democrats can claw them back.

During the final, frenzied week of the 2024 campaign, Donald Trump and Kamala Harris both made campaign stops in a place whose significance in the election had largely been overlooked by observers: Reading, a city of around 95,000 people nestled between the Schuylkill River and Mount Penn in central Pennsylvania.

Reading does not boast many of the noncollege-educated white voters who were widely seen as pivotal to Trump’s chances. Nor is it one of the educated, affluent suburbs or large metropolitan areas where Harris had hoped to run up the immense margins needed to lift her to victory. Yet both campaigns saw Reading as strategically critical—because this little city, which is known to most people as the nineteenth-century birthplace of the Reading Railroad, ultimately memorialized in the game Monopoly, happens to be nearly 70 percent Latino.

Trump had already shocked some Democrats in Reading by contesting it with surprising aggressiveness. He held two rallies in the small city and dispatched running mate JD Vance to campaign there twice, a remarkable commitment of time and resources to a reliably Democratic stronghold filled with nonwhite voters. What surprised Democrats was the audacity of Trump’s bet on making inroads among Reading’s Hispanics—a bet that made the city a critical test case of whether Trump’s ability to move that demographic his way was more than just a fluke of 2020 and might have more durability than many Democrats expect.

https://newrepublic.com/article/190897/reading-pennsylvania-democrats-latino-voter-problem

February 12, 2025

Litigation Tracker: Legal Challenges to Trump Administration Actions (an ongoing project)

https://www.justsecurity.org/107087/tracker-litigation-legal-challenges-trump-administration/

February 11, 2025

For everyone angry that Dems "are not planning on a government shutdown"

There’s a definite good cop-bad cop scenario playing out, I think. Rank-and-file is “open” to a shutdown; Schumer and leadership “aren’t planning” on it. Keep the GOP guessing and on their toes; they’re already in disarray.

Problems with preemptively announcing a shutdown:
—With reconciliation, the GOP wouldn’t need D votes to stop a shutdown. Promising it in advance is toothless.
—It’s better to come out of negotiations talking about how awful the GOP was — Dems had no choice. Announcing in advance makes it a Dem plan, and Dems get the blame beforehand.
—Dems are more likely to get decent concessions if GOP has to beg for help — especially if Dems haven’t already promised a shutdown.

February 11, 2025

A "Golden Girls" solution for Palestine?

Spoiler:
…
…
…
…
…
…
…
…
…
…
…
…
…
…
…
Give Greenland to the Palestinians. I can’t believe this was a joke, even then. On the possible plus side, I guess Trump wouldn’t want Greenland any more .

February 11, 2025

EXCELLENT explanation about how red state/district voters can leverage daily calls to senators/reps

Call DAILY about ONE issue — either the economy or the power of Congress.
Act as an ally/advocate for your electeds; express concern and mention specific examples of effects on your district or state.
Use their language.
Call back until you get through, if possible. If you can’t get through and can request a call-back, do it.
IF YOU’RE IN A BLUE STATE OR DISTRICT, SHARE THIS WITH FRIENDS AND FAMILY IN RED AREAS.

I do not normally share videos, but this really is well done. It’s about 15 minutes because it’s a bit repetitive, but I think that might be helpful for some voters.

&t=900s

February 10, 2025

What the Horrible Hostage Release Videos Say about an Important Israeli Failure

Part of the routine Israelis have become conditioned to over the past few weeks, are the ugly and deeply upsetting propoganda ceremonies that Hamas is putting the hostages through before they are released. However, these ceremonies are also signaling something much more strategic - Hamas still controls Gaza and Israel has likely failed in one of its most important war objectives of removing Hamas from power.

Why do I say this? To understand the dynamics of the war you have to return to the basics of insurgency and counterinsurgency 101, and lessons the United States has learned time and again in places like Vietnam and Iraq. If you are going to replace a terrorist organization or insurgent force who controls a territory with an alternative, you have to first clear it out but then also immediately establish an alternative security force or police and build out legitimate local governance that can replace it. If you don’t do these things quickly, the fighters you defeated just go underground and eventually come back and reestablish their authority. Unless what we are seeing on TV with these ceremonies is an incredibly impressive manipulation of smoke and mirrors, what it seems to be showing is that Hamas is still clearly in charge of Gaza and despite Israeli military operations has returned to key areas.

There are two basic ways to fight an insurgency. The first is what the U.S. did in Iraq in the early years 2003-2006 and in the key years of Vietnam. You go in to areas and search and destroy. You kill a lot of terrorists/insurgents using overwhelming firepower. You make a big deal of the huge body counts of terrorists killed. Then you leave and the bad guys come back, and you have to clear the area all over again. Sound familiar? It’s what Israel has done in Gaza. It doesn’t work.


Upgrade to paid

What is the alternative? From the beginning develop a plan where you clear, hold, and build. You have to defeat the insurgents and clear them out, but then you have a security force ready to go that can replace them and provide basic policing along with local governance structures that can start to provide basic services. This is what the United States did quite successfully during the counter-ISIS campaign in Iraq and Syria. The U.S. provided key military support, but worked from the beginning with Iraqi Security Forces in Iraq and the Kurds in Syria to have them both out in the lead, but more importantly quickly take over these areas and provide basic security. Then we helped them start to build local governance structures and provided surges in humanitarian and development assistance. This was a complicated and hard process and Northeast Syria and Western Iraq are from panaceas. ISIS remains a persistent problem in those areas, but it is not in charge.


https://ilangoldenberg.substack.com/p/what-the-horrible-hostage-release?publication_id=3741098&post_id=156850092&isFreemail=true&r=uc4h&triedRedirect=true&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

February 6, 2025

Musk's Status in Government May Violate Criminal Law

Elon Musk’s status in our government is unclear. But whether he is a regular government employee, a “special government employee,” or a volunteer, the primary conflict of interest statute prohibits him from participating in any particular matter affecting his financial interests or the financial interest of anyone whose interests are imputed to him, such as a spouse or a general partner. He cannot work on any particular matter affecting a company in which he holds either stock or any other form of ownership interest.

Musk might seek a waiver of conflicts laws, but any waiver request would be subject to a strict standard, such as the one applicable to all executive branch employees at 18 U.S.C. § 208(b)(1). Under that provision, a waiver is available only if the employee receives a written determination by the person who appointed the employee that the employee’s financial interest in a particular matter “is not so substantial as to be deemed likely to affect the integrity of the services which the Government may expect from such officer or employee.” That is a high standard, rarely granted.

Significantly, the waiver cannot be issued retroactively. The law states that it must be issued “in advance” of an employee’s participation in a particular matter. That is important because of the nature of DOGE, which makes even its volunteers subject to the criminal conflict of interest law. According to the administration, DOGE is not organized as a federal advisory committee. Instead, administration officials have claimed it is a “temporary organization” under 5 U.S.C. § 3161. That means that, even if Musk was a volunteer of the “temporary organization” called DOGE before he became a Special Government Employee, he was covered by the conflict of interest laws as a volunteer. That makes it extremely relevant to know whether he has a conflict of interest waiver, precisely when he obtained it and who issued it. Again, by law, it cannot apply retroactively.

We do not know if Musk has received a conflict of interest waiver. If he has and the administration is claiming the waiver is justified, officials would have to explain why his financial interests in particular matters in which he participates are “not so substantial as to be deemed likely to affect the integrity of the services which the Government may expect from such officer or employee.”


https://contrarian.substack.com/p/musks-status-in-government-may-violate?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

February 6, 2025

Specific phone calls and scripts for TODAY

(From my local resist group) We all need to call the Chairs of the Finance Committees in the House and Senate, the Treasury Secretary, and our own Representative / Senators. Below are their names, numbers, and an example call script:


Financial Services Committee - House

French Hill, R-Chairman - (202) 225-2506

Maxine Waters, D-ranking - (202) 225-2201


Financial Services – Senate

Ron Wyden, D – ranking - (202) 224-5244

Mike Crapo –R, Chairman - (202) 224-6142


Secretary of the Treasury:

Scott Bessent: (202) 622-2000 (general number)


Rep/Senators:

My Rep: Laura Friedman: (202) 225-4176

My Senators:
Padilla: (202) 224-3553
Schiff: (202)224 - 3841


** Note that the changes in the script are in the last two sentences.



For French Hill / Mike Crapo: (Republican Chairs)

“[Rep Hill/Sen Crapo] – I’m calling to express my great concern regarding Elon Musk’s access to various federal payment systems. Musk was not elected and DOGE is not a legal entity of the US government. I believe this represents a grave threat to our economy as Musk has promised to illegally stop lawful payments being made to fund critical services. I am further concerned with him accessing the personally identifiable information for all Americans as he has access to the social security database. As Chairman of the Finance Committee, you have a lawful responsibility to oversee the Treasury. You are accountable for Musk’s actions. Do something – get Musk and his affiliates out of these systems and investigate whether or not they stole sensitive information.”



For Waters / Wyden: (Dem Chairs)

“[Rep Water/Sen Wyden] – I’m calling to express my great concern regarding Elon Musk’s access to various federal payment systems. Musk was not elected and DOGE is not a legal entity of the US government. I believe this represents a grave threat to our economy as Musk has promised to illegally stop lawful payments being made to fund critical services. I am further concerned with him accessing the personally identifiable information for all Americans as he has access to the social security database. As ranking member of the Finance Committee, you have a powerful platform to express your opposition. I thank you for what you have already done. Please know that all Americans that are paying attention are terrified about the implications of Musk’s coup. Please continue to be as public as possible with your opposition and use every opportunity to raise the alarm."



For Secretary Bessent:

“Secretary Bessent, I’m calling to express my great concern regarding Elon Musk’s access to various federal payment systems. Musk was not elected and DOGE is not a legal entity of the US government. I believe this represents a grave threat to our economy as Musk has promised to illegally stop lawful payments being made to fund critical services. I am further concerned with him accessing the personally identifiable information for all Americans as he has access to the social security database. As Treasury Secretary YOU are accountable for these systems and for safeguarding this data. It is unacceptable for you to allow Musk to have any access to these critical systems. I am calling on you to get his access removed and to determine what data he may have stolen."



For my own reps:

Rep (whoever they are) /Sens Padilla/Schiff: "I’m calling to express my great concern regarding Elon Musk’s access to various federal payment systems. Musk was not elected and DOGE is not a legal entity of the US government. I believe this represents a grave threat to our economy as Musk has promised to illegally stop lawful payments being made to fund critical services. I am further concerned with him accessing the personally identifiable information for all Americans as he has access to the social security database. As your constituent I want you to understand how alarmed I am about this situation – it is totally unacceptable. I appreciate what you are already doing to oppose this coup, and I can only urge you in the strongest possible terms to make your opposition as loud, angry, and public as possible."

February 5, 2025

Lockdownyourlife: An interesting resource? Has a bsky account, is running "classes" for $1/1.5 hours

https://www.lockdownyourlife.com/