“This gets her attention. I realize that’s the sweet spot. I’m focused on Facebook the global political force; she’s focused on Facebook the global business force.”

When pitching herself to Levine for a position at Facebook, Wynn-Williams discovered that Levine did not care about Facebook’s impact on politics. However, Levine became interested when Wynn-Williams explained that foreign governments had the capability to slow or stop Facebook’s growth through regulation. The goal was to increase the number of users to increase the stock price, with a complete disregard for the effects of that strategy.

“[T]he punishing scale of work is by design. That staffers should be given too much to do because it’s best if no one has spare time. […] The fewer employees, the harder they work.”

Facebook expected its employees to work long hours and to travel at a moment’s notice. The legendary perks that the company offered, such as free snacks and meals, were to ensure better productivity. While top managers talked about the importance of family and a work/life balance, their demands made the realization of those goals extremely difficult.

“[T]his is the beating heart of the company, the growth team. Their values are the company’s values. Their priorities are the company’s. Those boys in the office who wanted to know what we stand for? This is what we stand for. Growth. More.”

Wynn-Williams draws attention to The Problem of Corporate Greed. Facebook sought growth and increased stock price even if that meant empowering repressive regimes. There was no substantive vision for Facebook to grow in a way that sustained democratic norms and personal rights.

“Of course, Facebook claims proudly that it’s instrumental in starting movements and conversations, in digital disruption, and she’s the COO. But it seems clear to me that she hates using the platform personally. Like most of Facebook’s senior staff, Sheryl hardly ever posts.”

Speaking about Sandberg, Wynn-Williams notes the irony of her commenting that the way to start a national conversation is to write a book. Wynn-Williams is also implying that top management recognizes the lack of privacy on the platform. The information of users is owned by Facebook and sold to advertisers who use that wealth of data to micro-target audiences effectively.

“This ‘don’t mention the children’ ethos is of course the opposite of the cheery slogans at Facebook to ‘bring your authentic self to work.’ […] Because the reality is that there is a big difference between what people at Facebook say and what they do.”

Levine chastised Wynn-Williams for telling senior managers, with whom she was traveling in Mexico, that emergency services had to break into her home to get to her baby. Her nanny had been locked out, and for a short time, she did not know why firefighters were in her apartment. This was considered a personal issue and therefore one that should not be discussed. With this anecdote, Wynn-Williams highlights Gender and Power Dynamics in High-Tech Industries.

“That’s what seems so outrageous to me about how Korea is being handled. The government there does have a law demanding that we get our games rated and approved, and it seems we’re refusing to even acknowledge it.”

Highlighting the lack of responsibility among the top leaders at Facebook, Wynn-Williams explains that Facebook rejected the power of foreign governments to regulate them. Yet Facebook was operating in South Korea. When Wynn-Williams suggested that Facebook cooperate with the Cybercrime Police there, she was dismissed. Instead, a lower-ranking member of Facebook was to precede Zuckerberg. If that person was not arrested, then it would be safe for top management to travel there.

“I couldn’t understand why he agreed to do this, but watching him, I come to realize the debt he feels to Facebook for getting elected. He really believes it wouldn’t have happened without us.”

Speaking about President-Elect Widodo of Indonesia, Wynn-Williams notes the risks of his meeting with Facebook executives, such as press scrutiny. However, she realized that Widodo attributed his victory to Facebook and felt indebted to the company. This is a clear example of The Influence of Technology on Politics and People’s Lives.

“What’s not in Mark’s email is more telling than what is. There’s no acknowledgment at all of the moral complexity of working in an authoritarian country that surveils its own citizens and doesn’t allow free speech.”

Referring to Zuckerberg’s email describing a three-year plan to get Facebook fully operational in China, Wynn-Williams comments on the complete disregard for the ethical context. There was no concern that Facebook could be used by China to repress the citizenry and violate the rights of individuals. The only concern was the growth of the company.

“The way he sees it, Facebook is a business and the policy team should be contributing to the bottom line. He doesn’t want to be viewed as a ‘cost center’ internally. Political advertising is a way to change that. And elections are the biggest opportunity.”

Speaking about Kaplan, Wynn-Williams notes the beginning of a major shift at Facebook. Elections were viewed as a revenue source with no understanding of foreign bans on electoral advertising. Nor was there any consideration of how this change would influence politics.

“It’s also hard not to notice that in nearly every case, his decision happens to coincide with his business interests, mollifying governments so he can keep Facebook growing.”

Instead of reliance on community standards to determine if posts should be taken down, Zuckerberg made decisions on a case-by-case basis. His decisions did not seem to follow any ethical guidelines, but they benefited Facebook economically. This is an example of corporate greed and disregard for its effects.

“After this, Facebook invests heavily in campaigns and elections around the world. Sheryl directs Joel to hire teams in Asia and Latin America and Europe. They’ll coach politicians on how to target specific messages to specific sorts of voters, and they’ll sell them ads. Make them reliant on Facebook for their power.”

This was Facebook’s strategy to avoid government regulations and taxes. There was no willingness to compromise with foreign governments and pay any taxes. With no concern or understanding for how this strategy might impact national and global politics, Facebook implemented it as a way to gain the upper hand on politicians and maximize profits.

“In short, Internet.org entrenches the digital divide between the haves and have-nots, by delivering a crap version of the internet to two-thirds of the world.”

Zuckerberg pushed Internet.org as a means to get more people on Facebook. Digital rights groups were against it because it lacked basic forms of security and checks on hate speech and sexual content and allowed governments to surveil posts. Wynn-Williams exposes the hypocrisy in Zuckerberg’s speeches about the importance of connectivity.

“He’s angered nearly every human rights group we work with, they’re now on the list of adversaries, and he’s about to torch all the trust we’ve spent years building with politicians and leaders around the world. And he doesn’t care.”

In his quest to get Free Basics, formerly Internet.org, accepted, Zuckerberg urged his management team to fight dirty. He wanted to compile a list of adversaries and use the platform and algorithms to pressure politicians or anyone who opposed this project. Wynn-Williams worried that this would alienate and anger world leaders, and she cites it as another example of Zuckerberg’s lack of responsibility and diplomacy.

“But the point when I realize that Facebook’s meetings with politicians are changing is when I see that Cameron and Osborne don’t want to confront Joel and Sheryl about any regulatory issues. What they want to talk about—and ultimately request—is Facebook’s support against the Brexit vote.”

Facebook’s strategy to make politicians dependent on their platform for political results was working. As a result, the power dynamic changed, with politicians, such as British Prime Minister David Cameron, asking Facebook for help and declining to regulate the platform. While this shift enriched Facebook, it would potentially negatively impact politics and people’s lives.

“Instead of helping figure out how to do everything possible to get Diego out of jail, Mark wants to turn this into a teachable moment for users and governments around the world.”

The head of Facebook demonstrated a lack of concern for one of his employees, who was under arrest in Brazil because the company had failed to provide the government with messages in a drug-trafficking case. Repeatedly, Wynn-Williams notes the callous disregard of top management for their employees. In this case, Zuckerberg was more concerned about public relations than ensuring the freedom of Diego Dzodan.

“Regimes that want to control and censor their populations now understand the power of Facebook to monitor what’s being said about them and who’s saying it.”

Initially, progressive candidates and causes used Facebook to gain political power. However, authoritarian regimes began to harness the tools of Facebook to repress the citizenry. Facebook, which cares only about growth, is willing to accommodate democratic and authoritarian politicians.

“[H]e states categorically that the suggestion fake news on Facebook influenced the election is a ‘pretty crazy idea’ and then follows up by saying that the ‘idea that that had any impact in the election is pretty out there.’”

In the days after the 2016 US Presidential election, Zuckerberg denied all responsibility for the outcome of Trump’s victory. He became angry when the mainstream media mocked this response. Shrage finally spelled out Facebook’s role in the election for him, at which point he still failed to initiate substantive changes at the company or issue a meaningful apology.

“The guy can’t even take responsibility for leaving his passport at home, let alone influencing the US election.”

Emphasizing Zuckerberg’s complete lack of responsibility and diplomacy, Wynn-Williams recounts an episode in which Zuckerberg forgot to bring his passport for a conference in Peru. Someone else took the blame for this, saying that Zuckerberg’s home staff needed better supervision. Shrage asked Wynn-Williams to call the president of Peru for Zuckerberg to enter sans passport. It was only because Zuckerberg also forgot some medication that she was spared that embarrassing phone call and the flight time was pushed back.

“There’s a growing realization among the FFC [Feminist Fight Club] that we’re going to be saved not by the captains of Facebook but by the crew. If we’re going to be saved at all, that is.”

Wynn-Williams was relieved to find that other women at Facebook were facing similar issues of harassment. Facebook’s initial response was to create a program linked to performance review that allowed men to game the system in their favor. Upset, women began to speak more openly about gender and power dynamics in high-tech industries. This atmosphere caused Wynn-Williams to complain formally about Kaplan.

“All the secrets of the trade that I thought would never be revealed to anyone outside Facebook. Facebook is providing engineers to demonstrate, offering ideas on how to adapt the settings to meet the Chinese government’s needs. It’s white-glove service for the CCP.”

Facebook was willing to do anything to get into the large Chinese market and facilitate the company’s growth. There was a disregard for effects, which could include the imprisonment, torture, and execution of Chinese citizens. Indeed, Facebook helped the Chinese government conduct surveillance using its software.

“No one suggests telling the truth, that his own security and legal experts have said that China will have access to the PoP [point-of-presence] servers and there’s nothing Facebook will do to protect US and other citizens from that.”

Unlike for other countries, Facebook allows point-of-presence servers for China. These allow China to have access to data, including messages sent to Chinese citizens from abroad. When Zuckerberg testified before Congress about Facebook’s relationship with China, he sidestepped questions and was misleading.

“To me, this type of surveillance and monetization of young teens’ sense of worthlessness feels like a concrete step toward the dystopian future Facebook’s critics had long warned of.”

In 2017, it was learned that Facebook allowed advertisers to target teens when they were psychologically vulnerable. This practice shows the negative influence of technology on politics and people’s lives. Because Facebook denied the truth about this practice, it is also indicative of Facebook’s lack of responsibility and diplomacy.

“At every turn, when Facebook’s leaders see how Facebook is inflaming tensions and making an unstable and frightening political situation much worse, they…do nothing.”

In Myanmar, the military junta used Facebook to incite hatred and violence of the Muslim minority in that country. Per Wynn-Williams, the leaders at Facebook completely disregarded the possibility of Facebook being used for tragic means and did almost nothing to monitor posts in this country. Instead, they focused their resources on China, where they were accommodating an authoritarian regime to facilitate the company’s growth.