Lion Heart 15,041 Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 Facebook Inc. chief executive officer Mark Zuckerberg has privately recommended several potential hires to Pete Buttigieg’s presidential campaign, a rare example of direct political involvement from one of tech’s most powerful executives. Earlier this year, Zuckerberg sent multiple emails to Mike Schmuhl, Buttigieg’s campaign manager, with names of individuals that he might consider hiring, campaign spokesman Chris Meagher confirmed. Priscilla Chan, Zuckerberg’s wife, also sent multiple emails to Schmuhl with staff recommendations. Ultimately, two of the people recommended were hired. The emails between Zuckerberg and Buttigieg have come to light as Zuckerberg faces unrelenting attacks from politicians from both parties over such issues as misinformation, privacy, election meddling and bias. Zuckerberg is scheduled to testify Wednesday before the House Financial Services Committee on Facebook’s impact on the financial services and housing sectors. ... Zuckerberg, 35, and Buttigieg, 37, overlapped at Harvard, and Buttigieg was friends with two of Zuckerberg’s roommates. He was also one of Facebook’s first 300 users. But they were only introduced years later by a mutual Harvard friend. The staff recommendations from Zuckerberg are the first evidence of the Facebook CEO actively assisting a presidential campaign. A number of other high-ranking Facebook executives, including David Marcus, the executive leading Facebook’s cryptocurrency efforts, Naomi Gleit, one of Facebook’s longest-tenured executives, and Chris Cox, former chief product officer who is close friends with Zuckerberg, have donated to Buttigieg. In recent weeks, Democrats have escalated their criticism of Facebook for its refusal to moderate political ads. Elizabeth Warren, in particular, has repeatedly attacked Zuckerberg and Facebook over its decision not to fact check posts or ads shared by politicians. Joe Biden wrote the company on Thursday demanding that an ad paid for by a pro-Donald Trump super-PAC be pulled down for what he said were lies about his Ukrainian-related work as vice president. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-21/zuckerberg-offered-advice-in-hiring-to-buttigieg-in-rare-move ▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morphine Prince 109,671 Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 Total red flag. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJHolland 12,725 Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 10 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said: Total red flag. He passed along like 2 resumes of people working at the highest levels of their field that happened to get hired But when Sanders had a legit heart attack after campaigning, and Warren still doesn't have a plan to pay for Medicare For All... you're like "Meh, definitely not red flags." Save the crocodile tears Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Othon 34,299 Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 Absolutely embarrassing. Imagine voting for the guy actively aligning himself with a billionaire tech giant working to undermine Sanders and Warren's wealth taxes. It's so, so sad that the first major gay candidate for president is attempting to become the standard-bearer for the status quo and for corporate America. Completely antithetical to the leftist roots of the queer rights movement. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morphine Prince 109,671 Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 19 minutes ago, MJHolland said: He passed along like 2 resumes of people working at the highest levels of their field that happened to get hired But when Sanders had a legit heart attack after campaigning, and Warren still doesn't have a plan to pay for Medicare For All... you're like "Meh, definitely not red flags." Save the crocodile tears Sanders is back to campaigning and healthy. I don’t judge people for taking health as a factor though. Warren plans to release details soon. Once they’re out we can judge. She’s praised for her other plans Zuckerberg, a man who is defending false ads on his platform, and someone who is terrified of a Warren (or any progressive candidate) presidency having to do anything with a campaign is a red flag for me. Also, I never said Warren not having a plan is not a red flag. It totally is. She should’ve had that down and that was the one thing at the debate that she made a huge mistake with. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whispering 18,865 Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 They are Harvard Alumni, attended school together and have mutual friends. It wouldn’t be a stretch to guess that Zuckerberg supports Pete for President. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Temptation 11,209 Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 Favours for favours Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
corvus albus 38,031 Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 1 hour ago, Lord Temptation said: Favours for favours Which kinds of favors? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bt1 5,213 Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 Political ads are moderated by classic media? Why Facebook should do something that Fox News doesn't have to do? Dont get it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
corvus albus 38,031 Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 12 minutes ago, Florin said: Political ads are moderated by classic media? Why Facebook should do something that Fox News doesn't have to do? Dont get it. Because you can choose to not watch Fox News but with Facebook ads you can't decide which you wantto watch because they're just on your timeline without your consent. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bt1 5,213 Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 40 minutes ago, corvus albus said: Because you can choose to not watch Fox News but with Facebook ads you can't decide which you wantto watch because they're just on your timeline without your consent. You can choose to not use Facebook. Problem solved? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
corvus albus 38,031 Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 8 minutes ago, Florin said: You can choose to not use Facebook. Problem solved? Or maybe Facebook can just behave and don't post fake news? Problem solved? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hybrid AT 78 Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 The faux outrage and hysteria in this thread... They aren't even policy positions, just mere data analyst positions. But never change GGD It's basically this, but "let's just make a mountain out of a molehill because we're too lazy to dig into the whole thing and it makes the candidate we don't like look bad" Campaign's statement from the comms advisor Also, interesting to note how the release of this article was timed with the release of the new Iowa poll, where it became clear he's a threat to Warren in Iowa I get it. Zuckerberg is a poison to the party and nobody wants their name associated with him. But this is a nothingburger. Nothing to see here, folks. "I was protected by the monks of Azarath, I was raised by my friends. They are my family, this is my home and you are not welcome here." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hybrid AT 78 Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 4 hours ago, Whispering said: They are Harvard Alumni, attended school together and have mutual friends. It wouldn’t be a stretch to guess that Zuckerberg supports Pete for President. Zuck hasn't publicly endorsed anyone so far. "I was protected by the monks of Azarath, I was raised by my friends. They are my family, this is my home and you are not welcome here." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bt1 5,213 Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 51 minutes ago, corvus albus said: Or maybe Facebook can just behave and don't post fake news? Problem solved? Why Fox News and any other network can do that, but not Facebook? This isn't about posting fake or true news. It's about verifying ads. Imagine if every network or service will need to verify every ad. Does this shampoo does that? Does this toothpaste solve this problem? Did this politician said that? Facebook simply doesn't want to open this Pandora box, because politicians will be politicians and they will play with the truth and accuse Facebook on other things like censorship. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Featured Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.