5 ms·

Her actual whistleblower declaration contains a lot of the evidence some may be looking for: https://live-whistleblower-aid.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/

Her actual whistleblower declaration contains a lot of the evidence some may be looking for: https://live-whistleblower-aid.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/2023_1128_Joan-Donovan-Declaration-LOCKED.pdf https://live-whistleblower-aid.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/up... To sum up the first few pages after skimming it, Facebook tried to bribe her (well "fund" her research), she refused. Later she had a meeting with the former head of comms at Facebook, who was now on the Dean's council, where he became incredibly angry with her research (page 4, 13). Following this, she got an email from the Dean of the Kennedy school which sounds very much like someone tattled to them and they now want to "review" her research (see page 5, 15). It continues from here.

LewisVerstappen 3y ago
If you're familiar with this woman's past research, you'd realize she is quite.... biased politically. She strongly believes in increased content moderation by "fact checkers". She's spread misinformation herself like - Suggesting Russian disinformation on Facebook shifted the 2016 election (anyone who's run a facebook ad in their life knows how absurdly ridiculous this is) - Advocating for increased censorship of information during COVID on lab leak hypothesis This is just off a few minutes of reading her past work. I'm not a fan of Facebook (in the slightest) but also am really not a fan of the type of censorship this person wants.
- sassy_quat 3y ago
  [dead]
jcheng 3y ago
Not sure why I decided to spend so much time on this on a Monday morning but I've read to page 35, and the picture is much more muddled. It looks like the FB Archive project gains momentum and launches but Dr. Donovan and the TASC get sidelined along the way (which understandably is very upsetting, you can feel the pain on every page). It does seem clear that the Dean doesn't approve of Dr. Donovan/TASC and he eventually shuts the group down, but if he allows the Facebook project to move forward under other groups that are also within the Kennedy school, then the title of this post is pretty misleading. (Oh, maybe why the actual article title says "initial team" instead of just "team".) BTW, not a particular fan of Meta, no feelings about Harvard/Kennedy school, never heard of any of these people before except Frances Haugen and Dr. Latanya Sweeney.
- ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
  > Dr. Donovan and the TASC get sidelined along the way this is described dismissively and in the passive voice, but it's an active action, and quite damning. who sidelined them, and why? it seems the answers are: the school, because the researchers upset facebook, who was giving the school money > if he allows the Facebook project to move forward under other groups that are also within the Kennedy school, then the title of this post is pretty misleading this is misleading: if the research is allowed to continue, it should continue under the researchers who did the research, unless there's a good reason otherwise
  - klyrs 3y ago
    "The school" is not a person with motive. Dr. Donovan's report strongly implicates the Dean, who maintains a personal friendship with Sheryl Sandberg, as the driver behind these actions. The remaining actors appear to be interest in saving their own necks.
- macksd 3y ago
  I think sidelining the lead researcher and giving the project to another group is accurately described at "gutting a team". No, they didn't end the project, but the series of events described seems to be insinuating that she could have led the project if she was willing to have her work funded by Facebook, listen to one of their former people, etc. So if that was their goal, and they just got someone else to do the work, is that any better?
  - cporios 3y ago
    Noting that the project and all its documents are publicly accessible to anyone at https://fbarchive.org/ https://fbarchive.org/.
    - mjhay 3y ago
      But further work from the same leadership has been discontinued...
1vuio0pswjnm7 3y ago
Exhibits https://live-whistleblower-aid.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/2023_1128_Joan-Donovan-Disclosure-with-Exhibits_Redacted.pdf https://live-whistleblower-aid.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/up...

LewisVerstappen 3y ago

If you're familiar with this woman's past research, you'd realize she is quite.... biased politically. She strongly believes in increased content moderation by "fact checkers". She's spread misinformation herself like - Suggesting Russian disinformation on Facebook shifted the 2016 election (anyone who's run a facebook ad in their life knows how absurdly ridiculous this is) - Advocating for increased censorship of information during COVID on lab leak hypothesis This is just off a few minutes of reading her past work. I'm not a fan of Facebook (in the slightest) but also am really not a fan of the type of censorship this person wants.

sassy_quat 3y ago
[dead]

jcheng 3y ago

Not sure why I decided to spend so much time on this on a Monday morning but I've read to page 35, and the picture is much more muddled. It looks like the FB Archive project gains momentum and launches but Dr. Donovan and the TASC get sidelined along the way (which understandably is very upsetting, you can feel the pain on every page). It does seem clear that the Dean doesn't approve of Dr. Donovan/TASC and he eventually shuts the group down, but if he allows the Facebook project to move forward under other groups that are also within the Kennedy school, then the title of this post is pretty misleading. (Oh, maybe why the actual article title says "initial team" instead of just "team".) BTW, not a particular fan of Meta, no feelings about Harvard/Kennedy school, never heard of any of these people before except Frances Haugen and Dr. Latanya Sweeney.

ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
> Dr. Donovan and the TASC get sidelined along the way this is described dismissively and in the passive voice, but it's an active action, and quite damning. who sidelined them, and why? it seems the answers are: the school, because the researchers upset facebook, who was giving the school money > if he allows the Facebook project to move forward under other groups that are also within the Kennedy school, then the title of this post is pretty misleading this is misleading: if the research is allowed to continue, it should continue under the researchers who did the research, unless there's a good reason otherwise
- klyrs 3y ago
  "The school" is not a person with motive. Dr. Donovan's report strongly implicates the Dean, who maintains a personal friendship with Sheryl Sandberg, as the driver behind these actions. The remaining actors appear to be interest in saving their own necks.
macksd 3y ago
I think sidelining the lead researcher and giving the project to another group is accurately described at "gutting a team". No, they didn't end the project, but the series of events described seems to be insinuating that she could have led the project if she was willing to have her work funded by Facebook, listen to one of their former people, etc. So if that was their goal, and they just got someone else to do the work, is that any better?
- cporios 3y ago
  Noting that the project and all its documents are publicly accessible to anyone at https://fbarchive.org/ https://fbarchive.org/.
  - mjhay 3y ago
    But further work from the same leadership has been discontinued...

1vuio0pswjnm7 3y ago

Exhibits https://live-whistleblower-aid.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/2023_1128_Joan-Donovan-Disclosure-with-Exhibits_Redacted.pdf https://live-whistleblower-aid.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/up...