WASHINGTON: Facebook has recently taken a harsher tone toward whistleblower Frances Haugen, suggesting that the social network could be considering legal retaliation after Haugen went public with internal research that she copied before leaving her job earlier this year.
US law protects whistleblowers who disclose information about potential misconduct to the government. But that protection doesn’t necessarily cover taking corporate secrets to the media.
Facebook still has to walk a fine line. The company has to weigh whether suing Haugen, which could dissuade other employees who might otherwise speak out, is worth casting itself as a legal Godzilla willing to stomp on a woman who says she’s just doing the right thing.
Haugen may face other consequences. Whistleblowers often put themselves at risk of professional damage — other firms may be reluctant to hire them in the future — and personal attacks from being in the public eye.
Facebook did not respond to emailed questions.
What did Haugen do?
Haugen secretly copied a trove of internal Facebook documents before leaving the company and subsequently had her lawyers file complaints with the Securities and Exchange Commission alleging that Facebook hides what it knows about the negative effects of its platform.
John Tye, her lawyer, said the team gave redacted documents to Congress, where Haugen testified on Tuesday, and also informed officials in California. Haugen also shared documents with the Wall Street Journal, which she started talking to in December, leading to a series of explosive stories that began in mid-September.
What was Facebook's response?
The company says it has been mischaracterized. “I think most of us just don’t recognize the false picture of the company that is being painted,” CEO Mark Zuckerberg wrote to employees on Tuesday.
Some company officials have also begun using harsher language to describe Haugen’s actions that could be interpreted as threatening.
In an Associated Press interview Thursday, Facebook executive Monika Bickert repeatedly referred to the documents Haugen copied as “stolen,” a word she has also used in other media interviews. David Colapinto, a lawyer for Kohn, Kohn and Colapinto who specializes in whistleblower cases, said that language was threatening.
In the same interview, asked if Facebook would sue or retaliate against the whistleblower, Bickert said only, “I can’t answer that.”
A week earlier, Antigone Davis, Facebook’s head of global safety, testified in the Senate that Facebook “would never retaliate against someone for speaking to Congress,” which left open the possibility that the company might go after her for giving documents to the Journal.
Is Haugen protected?
Various laws offer whistleblower protection at both the state and federal levels. The federal laws applicable to Haugen are the Dodd-Frank Act, a 2010 Wall Street reform law, and the Sarbanes Oxley Act, a 2002 law that followed the collapse of Enron and other accounting scandals.
Dodd-Frank expanded protections for whistleblowers and empowered the SEC to take action against a company that threatens a whistleblower. Protections exist for both employees and former employees, experts say.
Asked about her risk because she went to the media, Haugen’s lawyer, Tye, maintains that because Haugen went to the SEC, Congress and state authorities, she’s entitled to whistleblower protections. He said any suit from Facebook would be “frivolous” and that Facebook has not been in touch.
What about her leaks to the media?
Courts haven’t tested whether leaking to the media is protected under Dodd-Frank, but Colapinto said the US Secretary of Labor determined decades ago that environmental and nuclear-safety whistleblowers’ communications with the media were protected. He argues that the language of Sarbanes-Oxley is modeled on those earlier statutes, and Haugen should have the same protections for any of her communications with reporters.
Facebook could allege that Haugen broke her nondisclosure agreement by sharing company documents with the press, leaking trade secrets or just by making comments Facebook considers defamatory, said Lisa Banks of Katz, Marshall and Banks, who has worked on whistleblower cases for decades. “Like many whistleblowers, she’s extraordinarily brave and puts herself at personal and professional risk in shining a light on these practices,” she said.
Haugen effectively used leaks to the media to turn up the pressure on Congress and government regulators. Colapinto said her disclosures had a public-interest purpose that could complicate enforcing the NDA if Facebook chose to do so.
Could Facebook face blowback?
Facebook probably wants its veiled threats to unnerve other employees or former employees who might be tempted to speak out. “If they go after her, it won’t be because they necessarily think they have a strong case legally, but sending a message to other would-be whistleblowers that they intend to play hardball,” Banks said.
But she said it would be a “disaster” for Facebook to go after Haugen. Regardless of potential legal vulnerabilities, Facebook might look like a bully if it pursued a legal case against her.
“The last thing Facebook needs is to rouse the ire of governmental authorities and the public at large by playing the role of the big bad giant company against the courageous individual whistleblower,” said Neil Getnick, whose firm, Getnick and Getnick, represents whistleblowers.
Could Facebook sue whistleblower Frances Haugen?
https://arab.news/48q7e
Could Facebook sue whistleblower Frances Haugen?
- Facebook still has to walk a fine line
Roblox tightens messaging rules for under-13 users amid abuse concerns
- Video game maker said it removed ability to message others outside games on its platform for users under-13
- Roblox said it will also allow parents and caregivers to remotely manage their child’s Roblox account
LONDON: Video game maker Roblox said on Monday that it is implementing new safety measures for users under 13, including permanently removing the ability to message others outside games on its platform.
However, under-13 users can still message others in-game with parental consent.
The gaming platform, which reported around 89 million users last quarter, said it will allow parents and caregivers to remotely manage their child’s Roblox account, view friend lists, set spending controls, and manage screen time.
Roblox has faced claims of child abuse on its platform. In August, Turkiye blocked access to Roblox following a court order, as prosecutors investigated concerns about user-generated content potentially leading to abuse.
A 2022 lawsuit filed in San Francisco claimed that Roblox facilitated the sexual and financial exploitation of a California girl by adult men, allegedly encouraging her to drink, abuse prescription drugs, and share sexually explicit photos.
The company said it has also introduced a built-in setting that will let users under the age of 13 access public broadcast messages only within games or experiences.
Roblox will replace age-based content labels with descriptors ranging from “Minimal” to “Restricted,” indicating the type of content users can expect. By default, users under nine can only access games labeled “Minimal” or “Mild.”
These new restrictions will also prevent users under 13 from searching, discovering, or playing unlabeled experiences, the company said.
Restricted content will remain inaccessible until a user is at least 17 years old and has verified their age.
Twitch adds ‘Zionist’ to hate speech policy amid war tensions
- Amazon-owned streaming platform said term will still be allowed in discussions about political movement as long as they do not target individuals
- Decision follows pressure by US lawmakers and ADL, who accuse Twitch of failing to curb antisemitism on its platform
LONDON: Streaming platform Twitch has updated its hate speech policy to include the term “Zionist” as a potential slur, reflecting heightened sensitivity in online moderation amid escalating tensions stemming from Israel’s war on Gaza and Lebanon.
“Starting today, using the term ‘Zionist’ to attack or demean another individual or group of people on the basis of their background or religious belief is against our rules,” Twitch, owned by Amazon, announced in a blog post.
The platform, widely popular among video gamers, clarified that as “Zionist” and “Zionism” are political terms, they will still be allowed in discussions about the political movement, whether supportive or critical, provided the language does not target individuals.
“Our goal isn’t to stifle conversation about or criticism of an institution or ideology, but to prevent coded hate directed at individuals and groups of people,” the company said.
The policy update comes amid a spike in hateful content on social media platforms following the Oct. 7 attacks.
A report released in June by the Institute for Strategic Dialogue highlighted alarming increases in antisemitic and Islamophobic rhetoric online, including a 51-fold surge in antisemitic comments on YouTube and a 422 percent rise in anti-Muslim hate speech on X.
Twitch’s move follows pressure from US Congressman Ritchie Torres and the Anti-Defamation League.
In a letter to Twitch executives, Torres criticized the platform’s handling of hate speech, singling out prominent Turkish-American streamer Hasan Piker as a “poster child” for what he described as “terrorism apologist” comments following the Oct. 7 events.
Torres, who recently secured re-election with significant support from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, accused Twitch of failing to adequately address antisemitic content and called for stricter moderation.
Twitch’s announcement aligns it with other platforms tightening their moderation policies.
In July, Meta began removing posts targeting “Zionists” when the term was used to demean Jewish people or Israelis, rather than in reference to the political movement.
This step followed allegations that Meta mishandled pro-Palestinian content, including findings from an Arab News investigation last year.
Netflix says 50 million households worldwide tuned in for Paul-Tyson match
Netflix said on Saturday that 60 million households worldwide had tuned in for the highly anticipated boxing match between Jake Paul and Mike Tyson, and the event peaked at 65 million streams, according to a statement.
The bout between the 27-year-old social media influencer-turned-prize fighter Paul and the 58-year-old former heavyweight champion Tyson, which Paul won, was streamed live on Netflix.
Nearly 50 million households tuned in for the co-main event between Ireland’s lightweight champion Katie Taylor and Puerto Rico’s featherweight champion Amanda Serrano, according to Netflix.
“The bout is likely to be the most watched professional women’s sporting event in US history,” Netflix said in its statement.
There were some hiccups during the live-stream of the match, with over 90,000 users reporting problems on Netflix at its peak, according to outage tracking website Downdetector.
However, the streaming platform was back up on Saturday after the outage that lasted roughly 6 hours in the United States.
Renowned Lebanese journalist quits MTV over death threats by alleged Hezbollah supporters
- ‘I decided to leave MTV because of the intimidations that reached the point of death threats,’ says Dr. Eman Shweikh on X
- Samir Kassir Eyes Center reports that since Nov. 12 Shweikh had been subjected to a campaign of threats, incitement, accusations of treason
DUBAI: A renowned Lebanese journalist has taken to social media platform X to announce her departure from MTV following alleged death threats believed to have been made by supporters of Hezbollah.
Not mentioning the Iran-backed group by name, Dr. Eman Shweikh, a TV presenter at MTV, journalist and university professor, wrote: “I decided to leave MTV because of the intimidations that reached the point of death threats and the harassment that I am exposed to, which reached the point of following me home and chasing me on the road, in addition to harassing my family.”
The Samir Kassir Eyes Center reported that since Nov. 12 Shweikh had been subjected to a campaign of threats, incitement and accusations of treason due to her political opinions that she publishes on X, and because of her work for MTV.
The purported threats and harassment prompted her to leave her job at the channel.
The TV presenter added in her tweet: “The (Lebanese) state is absent, and laws are inexistent, and I do not want to expose my life and the lives of my family to danger. I want to live in safety and peace. Thank you to the Chairman of the Board of Directors of MTV Michel Murr.”
Shweikh’s tweet received thousands of likes and hundreds of retweets and comments.
Speaking to Arab News, Shweikh said things got worse since the escalation between Israel and Hezbollah.
“In addition to the threats from Hezbollah supporters, my old friends sent me very negative comments, saying they wouldn’t allow me to enter the south, where my family house is located in Tyre, or return to my hometown of Al-Mansoury, she said.
“Some relatives even threatened to send me to Syria to be killed by criminals. I believe that the best decision for me now was to quit my job, although I am very sad and shocked. However, I believe that Hezbollah’s control will end very soon.
“As for my plans, I am ready to work as an anchor or perhaps a TV hostess, but I will not declare my political opinions until the appropriate moment,” she added.
Replying to her tweet, advocate Tarek Chindeb said: “The threat to kill journalist Eman Shweikh makes us believe at every moment that we cannot build a state in Lebanon in the presence of illegal weapons and militias outside accountability.”
Expressing solidarity, Chindeb hoped that the Lebanese security and judicial authorities would do their duty to protect her, and arrest the culprits.
Political analyst Magdi Khalil also replied to Shweikh’s tweet, saying: “Ideological militias do not know participation, but rather overpowering. They do not know dialogue, but rather the threat of violence.”
MTV journalist Nawal Berry and cameraman Dany Tanios were attacked in July while attempting to cover the aftermath of an Israeli airstrike on Beirut’s southern suburb, a Hezbollah stronghold.
It was not the first time Berry and her team had been assaulted by Hezbollah loyalists. During the early days of the Oct. 17 revolution in 2019, she and her team faced a violent attack and had their camera smashed.
Supporters of Hezbollah have a history of assaulting and threatening journalists. Targets have included Layal Alekhtiar, who received death threats in 2021 and faced legal action last year for interviewing an Israeli spokesperson; Dima Sadek; Ali Al-Amin; and others.
At the time of publishing, Shweikh could not be reached for comment.
What is Bluesky, the fast-growing social platform welcoming fleeing X users?
- Bluesky said in mid-November that its total users surged to 15 million, up from roughly 13 million at the end of October, as some X users look for an alternative platform to post their thoughts and talk to others online
SAN FRANCISCO: Disgruntled X users are again flocking to Bluesky, a newer social media platform that grew out of the former Twitter before billionaire Elon Musk took it over in 2022. While it remains small compared to established online spaces such as X, it has emerged as an alternative for those looking for a different mood, lighter and friendlier and less influenced by Musk.
What is Bluesky?
Championed by former Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, Bluesky was an invitation-only space until it opened to the public in February. That invite-only period gave the site time to build out moderation tools and other features. The platform resembles Musk’s X, with a “discover” feed and a chronological feed for accounts that users follow. Users can send direct messages and pin posts, as well as find “starter packs” that provide a curated list of people and custom feeds to follow.
Why is Bluesky growing?
Bluesky said in mid-November that its total users surged to 15 million, up from roughly 13 million at the end of October, as some X users look for an alternative platform to post their thoughts and talk to others online. The post-election uptick in users isn’t the first time Bluesky has benefited from people leaving X. The platform gained 2.6 million users in the week after X was banned in Brazil in August — 85 percent of them from Brazil, the company said. About 500,000 new users signed up in one day in October, when X signaled that blocked accounts would be able to see a user’s public posts.
Across the platform, new users — among them journalists, left-leaning politicians and celebrities — have posted memes and shared that they were looking forward to using a space free from advertisements and hate speech. Some said it reminded them of the early days of Twitter more than a decade ago.
Despite Bluesky’s growth, X posted after the election that it had “dominated the global conversation on the US election” and had set new records.
Beyond social networking
Bluesky, though, has bigger ambitions than to supplant X. Beyond the platform itself, it is building a technical foundation — what it calls “a protocol for public conversation” — that could make social networks work across different platforms — also known as interoperability — like email, blogs or phone numbers.
Currently, you can’t cross between social platforms to leave a comment on someone’s account. Twitter users must stay on Twitter and TikTok users must stay on TikTok if they want to interact with accounts on those services. Big Tech companies have largely built moats around their online properties, which helps serve their advertising-focused business models.
Bluesky is trying to reimagine all of this and working toward interoperability.
