Whistleblower Arturo Bejar Leads Testimony In Landmark Trial Against Meta (npr.org) 13
An anonymous reader quotes a report from NPR: Meta was infused with a culture in which employees obsessed over user numbers and consistently pushed safety to the side, according to Arturo Bejar, a former employee turned whistleblower, who testified today in the landmark child safety trial against the social media company. Only one man had the ability to change that, Bejar said: CEO Mark Zuckerberg. But he didn't. "At the end of the day, it was the company culture that Mark had created that made it so that it was practically impossible to deliver features that addressed the wellbeing and safety issues that we've been talking about," he said.
Bejar is a linchpin witness for a consortium of states led by California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey that sued Meta, alleging violations of consumer and child data protection laws, and that the company lied to the public about risks its platforms posed. The attorneys for the states say Meta designed Facebook and Instagram to hook young users and to keep them on site longer thanks to features such as infinite scrolling and the "like" button. Meta has denied the allegations. In his opening statement on Tuesday, attorney Paul Schmidt argued that the company was sensitive to the risks to teens, sought to address them and did not deceive the public about them. The state attorneys have not yet said if they will call Zuckerberg as a witness.
Testifying in federal court in Oakland, California, for a second day on Wednesday, Bejar, who worked on safety issues at Meta for eight years, said he interacted with Zuckerberg dozens of times, and charged that Zuckerberg was not telling the truth when he made public denials that the company put profits over safety. In particular, Bejar addressed a widely-shared Facebook post Zuckerberg made in 2021 after another whistleblower, Frances Haugen, shared internal documents with The Wall Street Journal that highlighted risks to the mental health of teens. In the post, Zuckerberg said it's "just not true" that Meta prioritizes profit over safety and wellbeing. "Based on my experience at Meta, that is not an accurate statement," Bejar said. [...] Bejar testified, at almost every turn the company chose policies that boosted usership and revenue over safety. Safety was "not a meaningful priority," he said.
Bejar is a linchpin witness for a consortium of states led by California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey that sued Meta, alleging violations of consumer and child data protection laws, and that the company lied to the public about risks its platforms posed. The attorneys for the states say Meta designed Facebook and Instagram to hook young users and to keep them on site longer thanks to features such as infinite scrolling and the "like" button. Meta has denied the allegations. In his opening statement on Tuesday, attorney Paul Schmidt argued that the company was sensitive to the risks to teens, sought to address them and did not deceive the public about them. The state attorneys have not yet said if they will call Zuckerberg as a witness.
Testifying in federal court in Oakland, California, for a second day on Wednesday, Bejar, who worked on safety issues at Meta for eight years, said he interacted with Zuckerberg dozens of times, and charged that Zuckerberg was not telling the truth when he made public denials that the company put profits over safety. In particular, Bejar addressed a widely-shared Facebook post Zuckerberg made in 2021 after another whistleblower, Frances Haugen, shared internal documents with The Wall Street Journal that highlighted risks to the mental health of teens. In the post, Zuckerberg said it's "just not true" that Meta prioritizes profit over safety and wellbeing. "Based on my experience at Meta, that is not an accurate statement," Bejar said. [...] Bejar testified, at almost every turn the company chose policies that boosted usership and revenue over safety. Safety was "not a meaningful priority," he said.
Surprised (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's a venerable tradition going back to the old Trotsky days.
Re: (Score:2)
Surprised he didn't "suicide" before the trial. More power to people like this!
I believe the current approach is accidental falls from windows in tall buildings (there is probably a hotel in Oakland with enough floors).
I believe he lives in Berkeley, so he probably drives, or is driven, or takes Bart, to the Oakland courthouse every day (the courthouse is a 1 or 2 minute walk from the closest Bart station).
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Surprised he didn't "suicide" before the trial. More power to people like this!
I believe the current approach is accidental falls from windows in tall buildings (there is probably a hotel in Oakland with enough floors).
This ain't Russia.
An accidental OD would be more appropriate, whether he was a user previously or not. No matter.
But why?
Even if the current Supreme Court somehow fails to acquit Meta, I can see a presidential pardon in the horizon.
Good for Bejar (Score:2)
People like this witness are the heroes we need. I hope he has security, though. With this much at stake, I wouldn't put anything past Meta or its political buddies.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I have severe doubts he needs physical security...no billionaire is dumb enough to use Mafia tactics to go after a well known whistleblower. RiCICO exists for this reason, go after the big boss if he directs others to commit such crimes.
Wow, two birds [thetimes.com] with one post.
Re: (Score:3)
Financial security on the other hand...I wouldn't put it past them to do whatever they could to make sure he can't find another job or penalize any tech company that hires him somehow, of course for other ostensible reasons.
In one of his interviews, he stated that he never expects to be able to find employment in his field ever again. Advocacy roles (in various non-profits), on the other hand, may be his future.