Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Facebook Businesses The Almighty Buck IT Technology

Some Facebook Employees Are Quitting or Asking To Switch Departments Over Ethical Concerns (businessinsider.com) 208

Posted by msmash from the moral-dilemma dept.
Some dissatisfied Facebook engineers are reportedly attempting to switch divisions to work on Instagram or WhatsApp, rather than continue work on the platform responsible for the Cambridge Analytica scandal, according to a recent report from the New York Times. An anonymous reader writes: Many believe Facebook should have done more to handle the data responsibly, and the events that followed increased scrutiny against Facebook, reportedly taking a toll on employees working on the platform. Since the news came out, CEO Mark Zuckerberg and COO Sheryl Sandberg have spoken to the media on a few occasions, but it was days before the company commented on the scandal, which it now estimates around 87 million total users affected. Then, a leaked memo from Facebook executive Andrew Bosworth written in 2016 revealed a "growth at all costs" mentality that put Facebook in a position to be held responsible for the situation it's found itself in. As it became evident that Facebook's core product might be to blame, engineers working on it reportedly found it increasingly difficult to stand by what it built.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Some Facebook Employees Are Quitting or Asking To Switch Departments Over Ethical Concerns More

Some Facebook Employees Are Quitting or Asking To Switch Departments Over Ethical Concerns

Comments Filter:

  • Is it really ethical or CYA (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sqorbit ( 3387991 ) on Tuesday April 10, 2018 @01:32PM (#56413333)
    Is this really a move because of ethical reasons. I can't imagine that anyone working at Facebook is surprised by this. I'd tend to believe the a over is more to cover your own ass. At best employees had a clue that something like this was possible, at worst they had direct knowledge of it. I don't think anyone working at Facebook suddenly had a moral epiphany.

    • Re:Is it really ethical or CYA (Score:5, Insightful)

      by HornWumpus ( 783565 ) on Tuesday April 10, 2018 @01:40PM (#56413377)

      They're catching shit from their SJW 'friends'.

      I'm sure there are many thoughtless morons working for Facebook that _were_ surprised by this. They shouldn't have been, but what can you say, morons.

      They still don't get it, they think: It's not that what they were doing was bad, it's that the evil 'Drumpf' people came in and 'used them' and their data for bad things.

      • Re:Is it really ethical or CYA (Score:5, Interesting)

        by CaptainDork ( 3678879 ) on Tuesday April 10, 2018 @01:55PM (#56413493)

        Both of you miss the point:

        These employees are mid-career and they know full well that lifetime employment is not a thing.

        As they grow their vocation, they may have opportunities to move into security or finance or places that just like to have ethical ranks.

        • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

          by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday April 10, 2018 @02:12PM (#56413613)
          Comment removed based on user account deletion

          • The words you are looking for are: 'Resume stain'

            But I don't think most of these clowns are aware enough to realize it yet. They are just virtue signalling.

            _I've_ worked in mortgage banking, not for a broker, a bank...they aren't that picky...Trust me, they did, more than they knew.

          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by DarkOx ( 621550 )

            Right.. A lot of talented people don't want be in an organization that is going thru upheaval either. talented people want to work with a team that is performing, not storming.

            I have lived thru corporate re-orgs before and even knowing my job was fairly secure the entire time its not a fun place to be.

            1) You have coworkers that are not secure in their jobs; they are stressed and usually volatile and temperamental as a result. They will be quick to try and blame other possibly you for anything that might e

          • All well said, and this especially:

            ... there is no work and employment loyalty.

      • I doubt it's so much friends, as fear of job security. Facebook just took a huge off the charts hit to trust. Some big names are making pretty bold actions of saying they are abandoning the platform. Honestly all it really would take is a few big names to endorse or back another service, and facebook could more or less lose 75%+ of it's audience, which would result in huge downsizing. At that point, moral concerns are not... you don't want a sinking ship to be your most recent job experience, jump ship no

        • Re:Is it really ethical or CYA (Score:5, Insightful)

          by JackieBrown ( 987087 ) on Tuesday April 10, 2018 @02:39PM (#56413775)

          Users will not be leaving facebook at any notable impact. You overestimate how much the average user cares about this stuff or even knows about it

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by mark-t ( 151149 )

          What service are they going to endorse? That's the open question....

          The next most popular social media platform is twitter and that's not really a plug-in replacement. Google+ could have been a suitable plug-in replacement, except, you know.... it's google, and there's about a next to no chance that they would do anything any differently than facebook did.

      • Re: (Score:1, Troll)

        by bobbied ( 2522392 )

        They still don't get it, they think: It's not that what they were doing was bad, it's that the evil 'Drumpf' people came in and 'used them' and their data for bad things.

        Obama's campaign did this, with FB's blessing in 2012. https://www.nationalreview.com... [nationalreview.com]

        Who of these cared then? (Can we say nobody?)

        • Re: (Score:3)

          by sycodon ( 149926 )

          Not a damned one of them.

        • Why do people still get moderated informative when they lie about the Obama campaign doing the same thing? The article you link to refutes your claim and its own thesis.

          The Obama campaign: a) said it was collecting data instead of doing something else, b) said it was the campaign and that it was collecting the data for the campaign, instead of pretending to be some other organization doing something else for some other purpose, c) made it obvious what it was collecting, and d) collected the data only when

          • BUT... Please remember that the Obama campaign KEPT the data for their own use in violation of the privacy agreements. The Campaign collected a user's contacts with consent, but ALSO then collected and KEPT information about those contacts WITHOUT a contact's consent. So, even if I didn't give consent, my data could have been collected and kept by the Obama campaign if someone who had me on their contact list loaded the app. This used the very same API that CA used....

            This collection was done DIRECTLY by

        • You misunderstand. Obama and his helpers cared greatly, this was at the time a wonderful new Democratic tool to get them in touch of their interested voters -- it was (literally) 21st century high-tech stuff. (I only heard that "they had it" but no details for this "excite the base" thing.) Hillary (who else?) was going to inherit this wonderful tool as well, with only a few plumbing problems. (A It was still Hillary, and B it was still Bernie. Hillary "Won" as she should have. That's why you make you'r

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Bodhammer ( 559311 )
        Maybe they could add a new status called "Virtue Signalling"?

      • Interesting

    • Re:Is it really ethical or CYA (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 10, 2018 @01:42PM (#56413391)
      No - I think it's ethical/moral reasons. They now feel like they got Trump elected and feel terrible about it. Of course they had no problem with this when their work got their political idols elected that was all fun and games and heroic.
      It's infantile.
      They had NO problem with this data collection and probably bought Zuckerberg's kool-aid ideology hook, line and sinker that they were making the world a better place with proper data analysis. Now they feel that this has become a weaponized technology and they want no part of it. If they REALLY cared about the abuses of data collection and misuse - they would be the ones to most know how to PREVENT and STOP it. They're leaving instead because they're disgusted with what they created.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by sinij ( 911942 )
      In Silicon Valley, being the most SJW-infested place on Eath, anything that touches Trump is toxic. When FB is now seen as being directly responsible for the election of Trump, these people found themselves in danger of "never work in this town" by association. They are probably better off putting prison time on their resume that admitting they worked on FB.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        That is just so wrong, I don't even know where to begin.

        First, "SJW" could just as easily mean people on the more conservative side of things who call people "snowflakes" or are pushing for tougher immigration enforcement.

        Second, you apparently do not live in the valley, or you'd know what you're saying isn't even remotely the truth. Yes Berkeley and San Francisco can do things that sound crazy when summed up in a headline, but when you start digging into some of the details, you see it is not some knee-jer

        • First, "SJW" could just as easily mean people on the more conservative side of things who call people "snowflakes" or are pushing for tougher immigration enforcement.

          Nope. Here is the definition of "Social Justice":
          justice in terms of the distribution of wealth, opportunities, and privileges within a society. "individuality gives way to the struggle for social justice"

          This is fundamentally liberal in the same way that marxism is fundamentally liberal. It isn't a huge deal... conservatives have their own annoying types but liberals get to own this particular group.

      • In Silicon Valley, being the most SJW-infested place on Eath, anything that touches Trump is toxic. When FB is now seen as being directly responsible for the election of Trump, these people found themselves in danger of "never work in this town" by association. They are probably better off putting prison time on their resume that admitting they worked on FB.

        False. Money drives SV. If you can code (or whatever), no one gives a crap you are hired. Nobody cares about your politics.

        • Re:Is it really ethical or CYA (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Train0987 ( 1059246 ) on Tuesday April 10, 2018 @02:50PM (#56413855)

          Tell that to James Damore.

          • Nobody (in management) cared about Damore's politics, they cared that a big ugly work-disrupting (i.e. money-costing) stink happened centered around him (that he didn't cause, those who distributed his memo outside its intended audience did), and fired him to try to make that stop (not that that worked).

            • I took a glance at what the Labor Relations folks said. They said he was not just submitting his essay where appropriate, but pushing it to people who didn't want it. He himself distributed it outside what should have been it intended audience.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Even if they don't personally feel bad about it, being involved in this scandal will look bad on their CVs. If they move to another department they can at least claim (through a lie of omission) to be involved when looking for a new job.

      Thinking about it, those departments are probably about to lose some staff anyway, given their new-found devotion to less profitable but ethical behaviour.

    • Re:Is it really ethical or CYA (Score:4, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 10, 2018 @01:46PM (#56413409)

      Is this really a move because of ethical reasons. I can't imagine that anyone working at Facebook is surprised by this.

      And they were cool with it when it was the Obama campaign scraping the data.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by farble1670 ( 803356 )

        And they were cool with it when it was the Obama campaign scraping the data.

        Hi Troll. I see you've reached line item #347 on your list of "Liberal Triggers". This one is pretty weak though. I'd suggest you follow up with #544, which is "Hilary responsible for Benghazi". Good luck!

    • If it were ethical, I would expect to have seen there resumes on the desk months ago. Right now these people are jumping ship.
      That being said. For a lot of employees, it is actually difficult to know when you have crossed the line. Because as employees we get closer to that line slowly, and are rewarded for each we take to waking towards that line. If you are put push back a little bit the Boss normally has a reasonable explanation. Here is a golden age Simpons quote...

      Bart: Uh, say, are you guys crooks?
      Fat Tony: Bart, um, is it wrong to steal a loaf of bread to feed your starving family?
      Bart: No.
      Fat Tony: Well, suppose you got a large starving family. Is it wrong to steal a truckload of bread to feed them?
      Bart: Uh uh.
      Fat Tony: And, what if your family don't like bread? They like...cigarettes?
      Bart: I guess that's okay.
      Fat Tony: Now, what if instead of giving them away, you sold them at a price that was practically giving them away. Would that be a crime, Bart?
      Bart: Hell, no!
      Fat Tony: Enjoy your gift.

      However they had crossed the line,

    • Re:Is it really ethical or CYA (Score:5, Insightful)

      by gnunick ( 701343 ) on Tuesday April 10, 2018 @02:56PM (#56413911) Homepage

      Yeah it's pretty disingenuous to suddenly pretend you have moral or ethical qualms. It has to have been clear to _anyone_ in the industry for years how fucked up Facebook is, and how amoral their behavior is. The only difference is now that the general public is getting concerned.

      I've been rebuffing recruiters from Facebook (among other corporate assholes) for years. Acting ethically (and insisting on working only for companies which don't offend my moral sensibilities), isn't a new concept to me. It does greatly limit one's employment prospects, but on the other hand I've never had trouble finding a job.

  • So quit if you don't like it. (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Why make sure everyone knows? Oh yeah, virtue signalling FTW

  • Auschwitz guards (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sinij ( 911942 ) on Tuesday April 10, 2018 @01:37PM (#56413355)
    I am sure these FB employees were just following the orders, but why act only now? FB practices were well-known even outside of FB, this couldn't possibly be the first time they found out what is happening in the showers.

    • Re:Auschwitz guards (Score:5, Interesting)

      by freeze128 ( 544774 ) on Tuesday April 10, 2018 @01:41PM (#56413385)
      Perhaps the engineers succumbed to pressure from their friends or family. Or maybe they were outright threatened by activists.

      • Re:Auschwitz guards (Score:4, Insightful)

        by sinij ( 911942 ) on Tuesday April 10, 2018 @01:45PM (#56413401)
        Considering HQ is in Silicon Valley, it is likely anti-Trump activists, and not newly found moral fortitude or rediscovered respect for privacy that motivates these engineers.

    • FB practices were well-known even outside of FB, this couldn't possibly be the first time they found out what is happening in the showers.

      They didn't care as long as it was for "progressive causes" and "progressive candidates": government healthcare, government retirement programs, a healthy middle class, breaking up big corporations, high taxes on capital gains, eminent domain, value-based compensation, etc. You know, mostly what those early 20th century progressives wanted [wikipedia.org]. And just like their predecessor

    • We really need different analogies or references for "just following orders." I get what you are saying but comparing this to attempted genocide is a disservice.

  • These people do realize... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by forkfail ( 228161 ) on Tuesday April 10, 2018 @01:42PM (#56413389)

    ... that Facebook's entire business model is based on collecting, using, and selling data and metadata about people?

    This sudden appearance of embracing moral behavior and ethics would be hilarious if it wasn't so pathetically self serving and so hypocritically self righteous as to be nauseating.

  • It's very telling (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Train0987 ( 1059246 ) on Tuesday April 10, 2018 @01:51PM (#56413463)

    How Slashdot and others keep referring to this as the "Cambridge Analytics scandal" as if Facebook's business model is only wrong when one side takes advantage of it.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      How Slashdot and others keep referring to this as the "Cambridge Analytics scandal" as if Facebook's business model is only wrong when one side takes advantage of it.

      Because the "wrong" side took advantage of it.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by bobbied ( 2522392 )

      How Slashdot and others keep referring to this as the "Cambridge Analytics scandal" as if Facebook's business model is only wrong when one side takes advantage of it.

      You speak truth! https://www.nationalreview.com... [nationalreview.com]

    • Indeed it is a very selective outrage.

      The lever pullers, the 'trending' curators and the talking points writers have decided Facebook is problematic for supplying voter data to the enemy. You aren't going to find Google doing that, and Facebook is either with them, or against them.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by SeaFox ( 739806 )

      How Slashdot and others keep referring to this as the "Cambridge Analytics scandal" as if Facebook's business model is only wrong when one side takes advantage of it.

      I'm sorry? I don't recall Slashdot ever getting a hard-on for Facebook and their business model. A site that's very existence is to spy on you for an advertising business has never been loved around here. If people are referring to this as the "Cambridge Analytics Scandal" it might be because they are referring to this specific current event and it's links to the current administration.

      Since you seem to claim this is a repeat issue and partisan politics are involved in the response here, would you be so kin

      • OP is alluding to the same kind of editorial bias that led to story after story ad nauseaum of Russia collusion.

        Likewise with the 'Cambridge Analystics' scandal there is a political objective at work. You don't have to agree or approve or support one side or the other to at least recognize that this occurs.

  • I had a WhatsApp chat with my friend about news analysis software which I have not done anything with for years, and 30 minutes later I was seeing Facebook ads for news analysis software.
    So Facebook is scanning my end to end encrypted chats, which is considerably worse than finding out I love gun toting puppy dogs.

  • How did they not know this? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by damn_registrars ( 1103043 ) <damn.registrars@gmail.com> on Tuesday April 10, 2018 @01:55PM (#56413495) Homepage Journal
    The very reason why facebook existed from the beginning was to sell personal information. Why did they take a job with them if they were concerned about the ethics of doing that?

    • The very reason why facebook existed from the beginning was to sell personal information.

      I hate to defend Facebook, but they don't and AFAIK never have sold personal information. They use personal information to target advertisements. They also provide a platform that allows other people to write apps which may collect personal information, with user approval. The CA scandal is because they weren't sufficiently careful about ensuring that APIs didn't allow access to data about "friends" of those who used the apps.

      It's totally believable that many Facebook engineers haven't scrutinized the app

  • "Facebook's core product might be to blame"
    Well, when something is free, YOU are the product. Ergo, YOU are to blame.

  • It's important to remember that Facebook's algorithm had a far greater impact on the outcome of the election than any Russian troll accounts did.

    It's time the FEC demanded discovery of Facebook's feed-display algorithm and make it public for all academics to scrutinize and criticize, for the survival of the Republic.

    I'm sure they'll get right on this after they finish prosecuting for the hacking of the Democratic Primary by the DNC. I'm still astonished the Berners didn't riot.

    Now back to your regularly sc

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Train0987 ( 1059246 )

      Facebook had ZERO to do with the outcome of the election. Not one Trump voter in the country is now thinking to themselves "wow, Facebook tricked me into voting for Trump!". All of these BS excuses are nothing but delusions to avoid facing the reality of being rejected.

      • Re:"Hacking" the Election (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Oswald McWeany ( 2428506 ) on Tuesday April 10, 2018 @02:40PM (#56413783)

        Facebook had ZERO to do with the outcome of the election. Not one Trump voter in the country is now thinking to themselves "wow, Facebook tricked me into voting for Trump!". All of these BS excuses are nothing but delusions to avoid facing the reality of being rejected.

        Not one person in the US thinks, wow that Pepsi commercial made me want to drink a Pepsi. Yet people do drink Pepsi, and Pepsi continues to advertise.

        No one thinks they're being influenced by ads, or political propaganda. Everyone thinks they're above that, but here's a secret: you are influenced by ads. You're at a store all it has is Pepsi, Coke, or Smith's off-brand cola and you want a cola... odds are very high you pick a Pepsi or a Coke because you're familiar with them- or if you do buy a Smith's it is because it is cheaper. Brand familiarity has made Pepsi or Coke more appealing.

        Same happens with these political BS stories. Trump is kinda like Pepsi- he's always throwing his name out there to get publicity. This facebook campaign was like an expensive ad campaign (and ignored by financing laws). No-one, not one person, thinks they were influenced by the fake stories... but they probably think that whilst drinking a Coke or a Pepsi.

        • Oh good grief. Trump won the nomination as a rejection of the fake Republicans he was running against and then the same people voted for him over Hillary Clinton. NOBODY was swayed by a damned Facebook ad. That's just delusional.

          • Oh good grief. Trump won the nomination as a rejection of the fake Republicans he was running against and then the same people voted for him over Hillary Clinton. NOBODY was swayed by a damned Facebook ad. That's just delusional.

            And no one ever buys Pepsi cola.

      • Not one Trump voter in the country is now thinking to themselves "wow, Facebook tricked me into voting for Trump!". All of these BS excuses are nothing but delusions to avoid facing the reality of being rejected.

        You should read up on how advertising works. You might find it enlightening.

      • Not one Trump voter in the country is now thinking to themselves "wow, Facebook tricked me into voting for Trump!".

        "Not one" is a really high bar. And, based on polling data, we know a lot of Trump supporters feel disappointed in his presidency. That some would blame "being tricked" over "being wrong" is just human nature. Whether they specify that it was Facebook that tricked them... I'm not sure.

        • If presented with the same choice tomorrow between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump do you think any Trump voters would be voting for Hillary? That's all I'm saying.

        • I'm very cautious about that noise about Trump regret. These are the same groups who's polling indicated a Hillary sweep on election night. If I had to guess the same mechanisms are involved too and the pollsters have learned nothing. 95%+ of the news is critical of Trump, it's unpopular still to like Trump, you call someone up asking them if they regret voting for Trump... some of them say "yes"... odds are in the voting booth next time they'll still vote for him again.

      • Not one Trump voter in the country is now thinking to themselves "wow, Facebook tricked me into voting for Trump!".

        Just because they're not thinking it doesn't mean that it didn't happen.

  • Are these employee's now just moving? How many years have they been working there and just now realize how FB uses personal data? Is it they didn't mind how the data was used if they believed in the ends it was used for?

    All of this could be true, but in the end they are looking out for number 1: Themselves. If you've worked in the Tech sector, you can see the end coming. The rats start abandoning ship first, or employees if you will. This is also a smart move as the company will put the blame on the

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • Spare us the crocodile tears (Score:3)

    by smooth wombat ( 796938 ) on Tuesday April 10, 2018 @03:21PM (#56414041) Journal

    Anyone who worked at FB who suddenly has a change of heart is being disingenuous or trying to save their skin. Everyone at the company knew their sole job was to collect data on people and sell it.

    They weren't offering anything to the users other than a place to spout off their nonsense. Since they weren't charging for the service (excluding advertisers), where did people think the money came from to run operations?

    To claim they didn't know or now suffer umbrage at what has been going on is a joke at best. They were happy to collect their large salaries and stock bonuses, being made millionaires overnight, while the data was being collected. Don't now come to the public and proclaim their disgust. If they truly wanted to make a statement, the least they could do would be to give back their stock and leave the company completely.

  • The memo is nothing, only the internet lynch mob would make anything of it. It was the equivalent of a hammer company executive saying "We make hammers so people can put in nails. Some people might hit people or animals over the head with our hammers, or use them to smash car windows. But we believe enabling people to put in nails is a valuable mission."

Slashdot Top Deals

UNIX is hot. It's more than hot. It's steaming. It's quicksilver lightning with a laserbeam kicker. -- Michael Jay Tucker

Close