Sheryl Sandberg Says She saw Materials from PR Firm
Last edited Wed Nov 21, 2018, 10:59 PM - Edit history (6)
Source: NBC News..(Facebook)
Sandberg, who last week said she hadn't known about the work of "Definers Public Affairs", said that emails referencing the firm had crossed her desk. Sheryl Sandberg, Facebook's chief operating officer, on Wednesday revised her account of her knowledge of the company's relationship with Definers Public Affairs, the Washington-based public relations firm that the company hired last year and fired this month after a firestorm over the firm's tactics.
Definers, a firm founded by Republican operatives, has drawn criticism since The New York Times reported last week that it pushed reporters to investigate ties between billionaire George Soros and anti-Facebook advocates -- a tactic that Soros' office called a smear campaign with echoes of anti-Semitism.
Sandberg, who is second in command at the company to CEO Mark Zuckerberg, said in a statement posted online on Wednesday that she had learned more about Definers in recent days after ordering her staff to check records.
"I asked our team to look into the work Definers did for us and to double-check whether anything had crossed my desk," she said.
What they found, Sandberg wrote, was: "Some of their work was incorporated into materials presented to me and I received a small number of emails where Definers was referenced."
Read more: https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/facebook-s-sheryl-sandberg-says-she-saw-materials-pr-firm-n939186
Previously, Sandberg, Facebook's COO said she knew nothing about ..Definers.
Evidently, Facebook was criticized by George Soros, so Facebook hired this firm, Definers to go after Soros. Going after Soros meant that Definers would try to blunt Soros's criticism of Facebook by reaching out to reporters and ridiculing Soros and his statements. (that is my opinion of what is meant here.) In order to get more info, you would have to read the NYT expose on Facebook. Further, Sandberg claimed she didn't know, but now she says basically she had some material "cross her desk" That is, Facebook indeed, did hire Definers, and Sandberg lied about that. (that is what the story seems to say)
Additional opinion....It is not, repeat not a good idea to revise a story, about whether or not one did indeed lie about something that you said, you didn't do (didn't know about this company) (Definers) and then say, Yes, "We did hire this company, that is..."some work was incorportated into materials presented to me.." A lot like telling one lie, after another..Is that correct?
So..The COO lied about something that involved digging up info on a critic of her company. In the process, that company "Definers" also lied about the critic of the company..Soros.
Me.
(35,454 posts)and we'll forget/be distracted from the subject again
Stuart G
(38,445 posts)I don't think so. What is much worse for her, is that Facebook is not totally necessary for one to live. Yes, a convenience, but if 50 percent of its subscribers left..those subscribers could find other ways of communicating...
....But if 50 percent left, what about the price of Facebook stock?..What about some advertising?..It isn't totally necessary, is it?
Me.
(35,454 posts)not a flood but a noticeable decline
Stuart G
(38,445 posts)leaving and communication needs to be made in other ways. That part is difficult..but time consuming. I have a facebook account, and I might leave.. It really is not that important..Yes, some communications from some, but I know I can live without it.
UpInArms
(51,284 posts)I deactivated my account after this report ...
spooky3
(34,476 posts)Stuart G
(38,445 posts)SergeStorms
(19,204 posts)For all the underhanded garbage they've been caught at it's a mystery why anyone would trust them with any personal information at all. I did sign up with Facebook about 4 years ago, and after one day I could see where this was heading. Over 50 people I didn't know wanted to be my "friend". Yes, I know you can set filters to reduce that, but it seemed like a gigantic pyramid scheme to me. I deleted my account the very next day. There's no privacy in this world anymore, but I'll be damned if I'm going to help the scammers do their work for them.
Progressive Jones
(6,011 posts)promote/discuss my music projects, but it's no longer a social hangout for me.
Ferrets are Cool
(21,110 posts)but for me, it is the MAIN resource for my clients and me to connect. I didn't choose this medium...they did...so in order for me to maintain their "business" I need to use FB. Before I needed this resource for business, I never used FB before I needed it for this purpose.
I have NO friends that I don't want as friends. It is very easy to say NO to anyone wanting to be your friend. Are there comments on FB that I disagree with? Yes. Is it easy for me to either block those comments or ignore them? Yes
There are millions who use FB for business. It has a purpose. Everything can be used for "evil or wrongdoing". I choose to use it wisely.
BigmanPigman
(51,627 posts)employees are pissed off at the media for "over playing" their activities in a negative light, the top two are supposedly getting along "better" now, they have to do a ton to win back consumer support, and will have to spend a very, very large amount to repair the security of their product. Times are not looking good for Fuckbook but if they are willing to bite the bullet they will manage. The problem for them is their greed. Not the first time this has happened and won't be the last.
Me.
(35,454 posts)and his 60% ownership and won't let anyone else in
BigmanPigman
(51,627 posts)That could be what brings him down more than anything else.
rockfordfile
(8,704 posts)blaze
(6,373 posts)The name just... irks me.