Mark Zuckerberg on NYT story: "To suggest we weren't interested in knowing the truth or wanted to hide what we knew or wanted to prevent investigations is simply untrue."

Facebook says it will take a couple of questions on the article but wants to focus on (looks at notes) its transparency report.
Good luck with that folks.
Now Mark Zuckerberg is running through all the tactics it's deploying to clean up the platform (you know like they should have years ago).
What every Facebook user should be reading in the meantime
https://t.co/ohyhUSyxTL
Mark Zuckerberg is vaguely denying allegations in the story and moves quickly to stressing solutions so people will stop talking about the problems. This is the Facebook playbook. Is the company misreading the room this time?
Facebook board statement on Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg: "To suggest that they knew about Russian interference and either tried to ignore it or prevent investigations into what had happened is grossly unfair."
This announcement that Facebook executives are discussing was planned for a long time. But the timing, coming a day after the NYT bombshell, is not coincidental.
https://t.co/dGsHGR99oB
https://t.co/aTsrWblscg
This is the note from Mark Zuckerberg: A Blueprint for Content Governance and Enforcement https://t.co/EtZu9sAHTT
ABC News: Mark, is anyone going to lose their job over this? If not, please explain.
Zuckerberg: Blah blah. I generally don't talk about specific cases of that in public. Blah blah.
Mark Zuckerberg: I have tremendous respect for George Soros even though we disagree. As soon as I learned about this in the NYT, I talked to our team and we are no longer working with this firm.
Wired: Why did you think opposition research was a winning strategy?
Zuckerberg: I learned about this yesterday. In general, I think you're right. This might be normal in Washington but it's not the kind of thing we want Facebook associated with.
Cheap seats: How does the CEO not know this? And why isn't the executive who clearly did know on this call?
Recode: Did you consider taking Facebook offline in Myanmar to prevent violence?
Facebook: ... We are bringing the world closer together.
Mark Zuckerberg: We have considered taking the service down when we were worried about a privacy or security issue. But he does not address Myanmar.
WSJ: Have you fired anyone?
Zuckerberg: We have made personnel changes. Hey, we just hired a new global policy and comms chief. Let's focus on that.
Lots of long pauses as executives confer on how to respond to media questions.
Asked whether he would step down as board chairman, Mark Zuckerberg says no.
"I am quite focused on finding ways to get more independence into our systems in other ways."
Bloomberg: After revelations in NYT article, how are things going to change in Facebook's relationships with critics, lawmakers and media?
Zuckerberg: Transparency is one of the bigger areas where we have to continue to do more.
The buck stops with Mark Zuckerberg, true. But no excuse for Sheryl Sandberg not being on this call if Facebook has found this new religion called transparency.
Also, if you are CEO of a major company and you learn really bad stuff about your company by reading it in the newspaper, you have a serious problem.
So, who did know on your team about Definers?
Zuckerberg: "I think someone on our comms team must have hired them."
Comms team, meet the bus that just ran you over.
Pressed again on who's responsible and who will get fired, Zuckerberg gets his back up: I feel like I have answered this question a bunch of times. I am not going to get into personnel decisions on this call.
Mark Zuckerberg just extended the call to answer more questions from the media.
https://t.co/Vp6KKvHGJ5
We are now one hour into this press call.
Finally someone asks directly about Sheryl Sandberg.
Zuckerberg: Sheryl learned about this at the same time that I did. Overall Sheryl is doing great work for the company. She has been a very important partner to me and will continue to be.
Facebook board: Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg are doing great.
Mark Zuckerberg: I have no idea what's happening inside my own company and neither does Sheryl.
Why do you believe you are the right person to lead Facebook?
Zuckerberg: We are doing the right things to fix the issues. I am fully committed to getting this right.
Asked about the review of lobbyists and whether Sheryl Sandberg will oversee it in light of the allegations in the NYT article, Mark Zuckerberg says new global policy and comms chief Nick Clegg will oversee the review and he reports to Sandberg.
Zuckerberg says the reality is he is not going to know every single thing going on. He also says he has confidence in his team who does know these things. 🤷‍♀️
Facebook has now ended the press call.
Thanks for spending the last hour and 22 minutes with me.
--30--

More from Tech

The entire discussion around Facebook’s disclosures of what happened in 2016 is very frustrating. No exec stopped any investigations, but there were a lot of heated discussions about what to publish and when.


In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.

In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.

This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.

In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.

You May Also Like

THREAD: 12 Things Everyone Should Know About IQ

1. IQ is one of the most heritable psychological traits – that is, individual differences in IQ are strongly associated with individual differences in genes (at least in fairly typical modern environments). https://t.co/3XxzW9bxLE


2. The heritability of IQ *increases* from childhood to adulthood. Meanwhile, the effect of the shared environment largely fades away. In other words, when it comes to IQ, nature becomes more important as we get older, nurture less.
https://t.co/UqtS1lpw3n


3. IQ scores have been increasing for the last century or so, a phenomenon known as the Flynn effect. https://t.co/sCZvCst3hw (N ≈ 4 million)

(Note that the Flynn effect shows that IQ isn't 100% genetic; it doesn't show that it's 100% environmental.)


4. IQ predicts many important real world outcomes.

For example, though far from perfect, IQ is the single-best predictor of job performance we have – much better than Emotional Intelligence, the Big Five, Grit, etc. https://t.co/rKUgKDAAVx https://t.co/DWbVI8QSU3


5. Higher IQ is associated with a lower risk of death from most causes, including cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, most forms of cancer, homicide, suicide, and accident. https://t.co/PJjGNyeQRA (N = 728,160)