There is a growing effort to discredit him – and it was probably inevitable –
Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen said in her testimony that an attempt would be made to “destroy” her.
Despite the fact that Republican and Democratic senators praised his Senate testimony, there is a major effort — and it was probably inevitable — to discredit him.
The gist of the campaign, coming from the right, is that he is a moderate.
Facebook’s anger management: Both sides embrace whistleblowers in heated hearing
As the Daily Wire, Free Beacon and others are pointing out, Haugen has contributed to the AOC and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. She’s working with the PR firm of Bill Burton, a former Obama press aide, who also works with the Center for Human Technology, which takes on Big Tech. She complained six years ago that Google was not engaging women enough.
And my response is: is that all you have?
Let’s assume that Haugen is a dyed-in-the-wool lib. So what? What she’s talking about is how Facebook spreads hateful content and harms teenage girls, in the name of maximizing profits, among other things. She says the buck stops at Mark Zuckerberg and is urging Congress to regulate the company. She is not making any ideological attack.
More important, while her insider point of view is invaluable, it is not her opinion. It has leaked tens of thousands of documents that show Facebook executives are well aware of the disturbing impact of their site. That’s a road map for the hill.
It has also been reported that Haugen had a federal lien of $44,000 against him for unpaid taxes, but this was removed in May. She’s set up a website and a GoFundMe page, which has raised over $38,000 toward her goal of $100K to help with her expenses.
I know many conservatives are concerned that Facebook, which banned Donald Trump, is biased against the right and that liberals want the company to censor content they deem unacceptable. It is a worth fighting.
But I don’t see how beating Frances Haugen helps to make that case.
ESPN Double Standard
During the Trump years, ESPN developed a liberal reputation, fueled by numerous run-ins with employees who made derogatory remarks about the president.
Jemele Hill called Trump a white supremacist and, of course, caused a huge stir, and nothing happened to him — even though he defended the comments on “The View.” ESPN later suspended the African-American host for two weeks, but that was for criticizing Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones. (Hill has since moved to Atlantic magazine.)
But the Sports Network took another black host, Sage Steele, off the air for daring to criticize Barack Obama.
Steele’s case is complicated by the fact that she just tested positive for Covid-19, and said on a podcast that ESPN’s vaccine mandate — she felt she was forced to vaccinate — was “sick.” He also criticized female journalists who “wear that kind of clothes.”
Then the topic turned to Obama, who wrote on the census form that he was “African-American.” Then the steel went:
“I’m like, ‘Okay, congratulations to the president. That’s his thing.’ I think it’s fascinating because his black father was nowhere but raised by his white mother and grandmother, but hey, you do. I’m going to do me.”
But she just wasn’t doing it. How is it their job to see how former presidents view their racial identity?
ESPN said in a statement that the opinion expressed should be “in line with our values and in line with our internal policies,” Steele apologized.
Still, what he said is hardly in the same category as Trump’s trash. And it raises the question of double standards.
OAN. Giuliani deal with
Rudy Giuliani has testified that he inked a deal with One America News Network.
In a lawsuit statement, the former mayor said that Charles Herring agreed to appoint one of his reporters to work with the Trump legal team, and that Giuliani would have veto power over what she could report. .
Christina Bob, the host of the weekly OAN show, has built a crusade against Trump in the 2020 election by claiming widespread fraud.
As The Daily Beast reports, the man who served as the former president’s lawyer said that “the rules we made with Charles were that he would defer to us for our needs.” So for the next few months, Bob “won’t be working so much for OAN, so talk of conflict won’t come up all the time,” and will have an “extra edge” over the other reporters.
But – and here’s the big but – Giuliani says he told Herring that “you have to agree to something that I know our news networks won’t agree to, which may be things you don’t do.” And she has to separate her role as a lawyer and if she wants to share things with you, she’ll have to get permission from me or one of my people.”
Just in case it wasn’t clear, if Bob developed a good story, “he has to run it after us so it doesn’t violate any of our rules or whatever.”
None of which was known to the people who saw the OAN.
It’s a truly astonishing admission that cries out for clarification.