Sheryl Sandberg denies downplaying Russian manipulation on Facebook

The righteous shock continues.

Sheryl Sandberg broke her silence Thursday evening about the New York Times‘ report on Facebook executives’ actions dealing with Russian manipulation, hate speech, and other crises on the platform. The report specifically detailed Sandberg’s role as a political operative within Facebook, seeking to shield the company from scrutiny and legislation in multiple instances.

In a Facebook post, Sandberg denied the Times‘ report, and said that she never interfered with taking action on the Russian investigation, nor did she empower others to do so. 

“On a number of issues – including spotting and understanding the Russian interference we saw in the 2016 election – Mark and I have said many times we were too slow,” Sandberg wrote. “But to suggest that we weren’t interested in knowing the truth, or we wanted to hide what we knew, or that we tried to prevent investigations, is simply untrue. The allegations saying I personally stood in the way are also just plain wrong.”

In particular, Sandberg says that investigating Russian manipulation of Facebook was extremely important to her. She denies knowing about the work of Definers, the PR term which the Times said used opposition-research tactics to boost Facebook’s reputation while disparaging its competitors, and that Facebook fired Thursday. And she showed her support for George Soros, whom Definers reportedly attempted to tie to an anti-Facebook activist group to undermine it with anti-semitic conspiracy theories.

But here’s the thing: Sandberg doesn’t really address most of what the Times article exposed about her role at Facebook over the last three crisis-ridden years. Which was how Sandberg sought to mitigate public relations damage, court politicians, and stymie potential regulations, through lobbying and the hiring of a team of political operatives empowered to represent Facebook in Washington.

Sandberg, who is a former Clinton administration official, reportedly brought on the Bush White House alum Joel Kaplan to lead corporate public policy. When thorny issues like, oh, Trump’s racist statements about Muslims, turned up, Sandberg turned to Kaplan for counsel, and Kaplan reportedly had a significant impact.

If Facebook implicated Russia further, Mr. Kaplan said, Republicans would accuse the company of siding with Democrats. And if Facebook pulled down the Russians’ fake pages, regular Facebook users might also react with outrage at having been deceived: His own mother-in-law, Mr. Kaplan said, had followed a Facebook page created by Russian trolls.

Ms. Sandberg sided with Mr. Kaplan, recalled four people involved.

After Trump won the presidential election, Sandberg reportedly expanded Kaplan’s role, and he hired a team of Washington players to review policy and lobby on Facebook’s behalf. As a result, at multiple turns, Facebook took political optics into account when making major policy decisions — including how to apply its Community Standards, with regard to Trump, and how much to divulge about the Russian connection to social media manipulation. 

Sandberg says she did not “stand in the way” of investigations into Russia’s use of Facebook, but she certainly empowered a team whose job it was to lessen the blow of Facebook’s actions in Washington, which did impact policy decisions.

Sandberg too says she is dedicated to “stamp out abuse in our system.” But the Times reports that along the way, she has sought to undertake this goal apparently without government oversight and regulation. 

While Facebook had publicly declared itself ready for new federal regulations, Ms. Sandberg privately contended that the social network was already adopting the best reforms and policies available. Heavy-handed regulation, she warned, would only disadvantage smaller competitors.

Sandberg reportedly took trips to Washington to meet with lawmakers and sent hand-written thank you notes. She asked Senator Amy Klobuchar to back off her Facebook regulation (she did not). The Times reports that “Ms Sandberg’s subordinates took a similar approach in Washington”: keeping in contact with lawmakers to downplay Russia’s role on the platform. And Kaplan’s team reportedly expanded its reach to reviewing Facebook policy and communications for “words or phrases that might rile conservatives.”

In her note, Sandberg repeated Facebook’s phrase that “we were too slow” to investigate Russian manipulation. But she also denies delaying or downplaying any investigation. So what, in fact, does “too slow” mean, if not managing the company’s findings for the most favorable public relations and political responses? As COO and the apparent boss of political teams like Kaplan’s, Sandberg was doing her job just as any other corporate executive would: yes, investigating threats, but trying to do so without blowing up her company’s public and political standing. 

The problem with acknowledging this reality is that Facebook continually tries to portray itself as the benevolent managers of a positive “community.” That narrative is inconsistent with icky but pervasive and mundane things like lobbying and PR campaigns — the domain over which Sheryl Sandberg apparently has control. Denying that politics had an impact on Facebook’s response to Russia’s role on the platform is frankly unbelievable.

So Sheryl, forgive us if we’re “too slow” to forgive you.