3 ms·

It's obvious her PR team thinks it's better to just stay quiet than putting any sort of statement out. If you've met her, you'll know she's extremely brilliant

by foobaw 9y ago

It's obvious her PR team thinks it's better to just stay quiet than putting any sort of statement out. If you've met her, you'll know she's extremely brilliant, but I don't think this situation is something that can be solved by a statement. I'm assuming a lot of actions will be taken first internally before she speaks publically.

fatjokes 9y ago
> If you've met her, you'll know she's extremely brilliant Any examples?
- iopuy 9y ago
  Does brilliant need to be quantified?
  - iopuy 9y ago
    Replying to my reply. What I mean is the phrase "extremely brilliant" could be restated as just "brilliant." This wasn't a slight on your comment, I'd also like to hear some examples.
  - fatjokes 9y ago
    Well the parent stated "if you met her, you'd know...". So I was wondering if they had specific examples that would lead someone who meets her to come to that conclusion. I wasn't paying attention to the "extremely" part. Of course there's her background, but 1) that doesn't require anyone to know her and 2) it means she's successful, which may or may not mean she's brilliant. Perhaps I'm just jaded by years in a BigCo. All a high position means to me is that they're "brilliant" at politicking and networking. (And staying silent in this case may be an example of that "brilliance").
SlowRobotAhead 9y ago
This is obvious and the best move she can make for her employer. I don't get why this would be "infuriating" or a mystery. OF COURSE she's going to lay low.
- TheOtherHobbes 9y ago
  OF COURSE only follows if this is such an unsolveable problem that running away is the only option. Given that the FTC are making interested noises and the EU are very interested too, it’s just as likely she’s trying to avoid getting “her brand” too closely associated with the mess. If I’m wrong and the problem is fixable, now is the perfect time to demonstrate extreme brilliance by fixing it.
adventured 9y ago
They've been working pretty hard to avoid Sandberg getting any of the credit that she apparently deserves. Facebook bent the NY Times to altering one of its recent stories that noted Sandberg's culpability in one of the messes. "Mr. Stamos had been a strong advocate inside the company for investigation and disclosing Russian activity on Facebook, often to the consternation of other top executives, including Sheryl Sandberg, the social network’s chief operating officer, according to the current and former employees, who asked not to be identified discussing internal matters." "Perlroth [NY Times reporter], however, confirmed that a change occurred after Facebook’s public relations team reached out to the New York Times with a statement some time after the story was published." https://lawandcrime.com/exclusive/facebook-forces-nyt-to-quietly-delete-unflattering-reference-to-sheryl-sandberg-in-story-about-russian-trolls/ https://lawandcrime.com/exclusive/facebook-forces-nyt-to-qui...
- exolymph 9y ago
  NYT heavily disputed that: https://www.cjr.org/the_new_gatekeepers/nytimes-facebook.php https://www.cjr.org/the_new_gatekeepers/nytimes-facebook.php
Panjam 9y ago
It's laughable she is called brilliant: anyone with a shred of common sense would guess that a douchebag business model like FB is ultimately going to be a liability.
Rainymood 9y ago
Honestly, it wouldn't matter what she would say, people will be outraged anyway.

by foobaw 9y ago

fatjokes 9y ago

> If you've met her, you'll know she's extremely brilliant Any examples?

iopuy 9y ago
Does brilliant need to be quantified?
- iopuy 9y ago
  Replying to my reply. What I mean is the phrase "extremely brilliant" could be restated as just "brilliant." This wasn't a slight on your comment, I'd also like to hear some examples.
- fatjokes 9y ago
  Well the parent stated "if you met her, you'd know...". So I was wondering if they had specific examples that would lead someone who meets her to come to that conclusion. I wasn't paying attention to the "extremely" part. Of course there's her background, but 1) that doesn't require anyone to know her and 2) it means she's successful, which may or may not mean she's brilliant. Perhaps I'm just jaded by years in a BigCo. All a high position means to me is that they're "brilliant" at politicking and networking. (And staying silent in this case may be an example of that "brilliance").

SlowRobotAhead 9y ago

This is obvious and the best move she can make for her employer. I don't get why this would be "infuriating" or a mystery. OF COURSE she's going to lay low.

TheOtherHobbes 9y ago
OF COURSE only follows if this is such an unsolveable problem that running away is the only option. Given that the FTC are making interested noises and the EU are very interested too, it’s just as likely she’s trying to avoid getting “her brand” too closely associated with the mess. If I’m wrong and the problem is fixable, now is the perfect time to demonstrate extreme brilliance by fixing it.

adventured 9y ago

They've been working pretty hard to avoid Sandberg getting any of the credit that she apparently deserves. Facebook bent the NY Times to altering one of its recent stories that noted Sandberg's culpability in one of the messes. "Mr. Stamos had been a strong advocate inside the company for investigation and disclosing Russian activity on Facebook, often to the consternation of other top executives, including Sheryl Sandberg, the social network’s chief operating officer, according to the current and former employees, who asked not to be identified discussing internal matters." "Perlroth [NY Times reporter], however, confirmed that a change occurred after Facebook’s public relations team reached out to the New York Times with a statement some time after the story was published." https://lawandcrime.com/exclusive/facebook-forces-nyt-to-quietly-delete-unflattering-reference-to-sheryl-sandberg-in-story-about-russian-trolls/ https://lawandcrime.com/exclusive/facebook-forces-nyt-to-qui...

exolymph 9y ago
NYT heavily disputed that: https://www.cjr.org/the_new_gatekeepers/nytimes-facebook.php https://www.cjr.org/the_new_gatekeepers/nytimes-facebook.php

Panjam 9y ago

It's laughable she is called brilliant: anyone with a shred of common sense would guess that a douchebag business model like FB is ultimately going to be a liability.

Rainymood 9y ago

Honestly, it wouldn't matter what she would say, people will be outraged anyway.