Inside Facebook: What Do Project Veritas Leaks Show?

Project Veritas has recently released two unedited recordings of internal Q&A sessions from Facebook, where some of the company’s top figures address, among other things, recent events in US politics - the Capitol breach and the deplatforming of Donald Trump from most social media platforms that followed it. Remaining diplomatic about the situation, Facebook’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg, along with others, reiterated their view that the decision to ban the president was well justified and legitimate.

In line with much of the press coverage of the Capitol breach, Zuckerberg proclaimed during the first leaked Q&A session taking place on January 7th that the event “wasn’t a protest - [it] was a violent insurrection”. He then continued to expand on his view of the Capitol protest:

“These completely shocking events of the last 24 hours, I think, have clearly demonstrated that the president intends to use his remaining time in office to undermine the peaceful and lawful transition of power to his elected successor, Joe Biden. And his decision to condone, rather than condemn, the actions of his supporters in the Capitol, I think, has rightly bothered and disturbed people in the US and all around the world.”

This view is similar to that of much of the current political and corporate circles in the US. Among many statements of Trump’s in the weeks leading up to January 6th, there have been assurances of a smooth transition from his administration to Biden’s, as well as reaffirmations of his conviction that the election had been stolen from him. It was possible, through selective reporting on his comments, to make the case that he had never intended to allow for a peaceful transfer of power, and for that case to become prominent.

Zuckerberg also addressed the alleged lax treatment by the police of the Capitol protesters, which, in his view, was in stark contrast to how the police approached protests led by Black Lives Matter and Antifa in mid-2020.

Monica Bickert, Facebook’s Head of Global Policy Management, commented on Facebook’s rules regarding the removal of content from the platform:

“We now have a policy that says: During this time of heightened risk, we will remove any calls for people to bring weapons to any location in the United States, not just in Washington, D.C. but anywhere.”

On the issue of removing the now-famous video which Trump released during the Capitol breach, she explained: 

“We felt that these posts did more to contribute to, rather than diminish, the risk of continuing violence.”

This statement was a reiteration of the statement made by Facebook’s Vice-President for Integrity Guy Rosen immediately after the removal of the video on January 6th.

The video in question was released by Trump around 4:17 p.m. EST, as the Capitol breach was underway. In it, he asked for the violence to stop and for people to go home in peace while reaffirming his commitment to the position that the election had been stolen from him.

In the leaked internal Facebook Q&A session from January 21st, a day after Biden’s inauguration, Zuckerberg said that he was “looking forward to … working together with this new administration” on a number of things, starting with the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. This position marks a significant change in the relations between the incumbent administration and Facebook, as, under Trump, the company was exposed to an increased degree of bellicose rhetoric and “working together” might not have been as productive for Facebook.

Facebook’s Head of Global Affairs, Nick Clegg, commented on the involvement of the company’s ‘Oversight Board’ in reviewing the decision to ban Trump from the platform. Clegg reiterated that the Board is composed of “credible” and “accomplished” people, who are expected to pass a judgment on whether the ongoing ban of Donald Trump is legitimate and justified. He stressed that if a negative verdict were to be reached by the Board, Facebook would be bound to reverse the ban.

Responding to a question on whether the Oversight Board should have been involved in the decision to ban Trump from the start, he explained that the body is not there to provide ‘real-time guidance’ to Facebook’s moderation team. Rather, it is intended to provide a retrospective, quasi-judicial review of the actions taken. In the case of Trump, the Board has up to 90 days to reach their decision, possibly reversing his ban by this deadline.

Addressing the criticism aimed at Facebook from many parts of the world regarding their deplatforming of prominent political figures, Clegg said he agreed with the critics that Facebook should not be the one making the crucial decisions on who to ban and when - rather, that these decisions should be made “democratically”. However, he added that according to him, Facebook is forced to make these decisions instead, because “at the moment, those democratically agreed rules don’t exist”.

The January 21st Q&A session also featured Roy Austin, Facebook’s newly-appointed Vice-President for Civil Rights - a new position, first of its kind in the industry. In his statement, he posed that the goal the company should strive for is to “run every major decision through a civil rights lens”.

Beyond the events at the Capitol, in the January 7th Q&A session, Zuckerberg addressed the goals and aims of Facebook for the year 2021 and beyond, emphasising the issues of privacy, encryption, fostering communities which gather in Facebook Groups and supporting small businesses operating through Facebook. In the later session, together with Head of Whatsapp Will Cathcart, he claimed that the recent controversy over changes in Whatsapp’s terms of service, which produced a considerable controversy regarding users’ privacy, was a result of inadequate communication with the public about the upcoming changes. Cathcart maintained that there will be no changes to users’ personal messages or privacy and the only adjustments made are more, optional features being added to the app.

Responding to a question about which type of data about users’ messages Whatsapp is able to access, Zuckerberg responded that no one can see the content of users’ messages. He added that if one interacts with a business or an advert through the app, Whatsapp ‘knows’ that this interaction (a click or a conversation) happened - he added that this is something that the public should reasonably expect. Notably, Zuckerberg did not specify whether Whatsapp and/or Facebook have access to the metadata concerning their users’ networking with other, non-business-related individuals.

In a teaser for the release of the leak, James O’Keefe hinted at big revelations about to be released. He uses the hashtag #ExposeZuck to signal significant news. In this respect, the releases so far are disappointing. They do show Zuckerberg and his employees expressing their beliefs in the narratives surrounding the election and the Capitol protest which dominate the large-corporate and media spheres. But this is by-and-large in line with expectations anyone might have had of Facebook or any other prominent company. Unlike in the case of recent Twitter leaks released by Project Veritas, in these meetings, Facebook’s top figures are not outlining any long-term plans to intensify current censorship efforts. At the same time, although unlikely due to its composition, there is a theoretical possibility that future decisions of the Oversight Board might lead to reversals of some of the bannings. It is much more likely, however, that the Board will affirm Facebook’s decisions thus far as legitimate.

Still, more news and releases might be coming from Project Veritas in the following days.

Follow Project Veritas on YouTube.