Some Facebook Employees Are Quitting or Asking To Switch Departments Over Ethical Concerns (businessinsider.com)

Some dissatisfied Facebook engineers are reportedly attempting to switch divisions to work on Instagram or WhatsApp, rather than continue work on the platform responsible for the Cambridge Analytica scandal, according to a recent report from the New York Times. An anonymous reader writes: Many believe Facebook should have done more to handle the data responsibly, and the events that followed increased scrutiny against Facebook, reportedly taking a toll on employees working on the platform. Since the news came out, CEO Mark Zuckerberg and COO Sheryl Sandberg have spoken to the media on a few occasions, but it was days before the company commented on the scandal, which it now estimates around 87 million total users affected. Then, a leaked memo from Facebook executive Andrew Bosworth written in 2016 revealed a "growth at all costs" mentality that put Facebook in a position to be held responsible for the situation it's found itself in. As it became evident that Facebook's core product might be to blame, engineers working on it reportedly found it increasingly difficult to stand by what it built.

Comments

Is it really ethical or CYA

[sqorbit]

Is this really a move because of ethical reasons. I can't imagine that anyone working at Facebook is surprised by this. I'd tend to believe the a over is more to cover your own ass. At best employees had a clue that something like this was possible, at worst they had direct knowledge of it. I don't think anyone working at Facebook suddenly had a moral epiphany.

Re:Is it really ethical or CYA

[HornWumpus]

They're catching shit from their SJW 'friends'.

I'm sure there are many thoughtless morons working for Facebook that _were_ surprised by this. They shouldn't have been, but what can you say, morons.

They still don't get it, they think: It's not that what they were doing was bad, it's that the evil 'Drumpf' people came in and 'used them' and their data for bad things.

Re:Is it really ethical or CYA

[adosch]

ABSOLUTELY correct. Some things look really 'good' on resumes for an amount of time, and some things are going to appear sour. How do you think some employees during the 90's Enron felt? "Oh, you worked... there? Um, we'll call you in a few weeks!" even if they worked in the damn mail room. I know I'd be doing the same exact move if I was in that situation, especially when there's going to be a stigma attached. This isn't the era your Grandpa or Dad worked in; there is no work and employment loyalty. People do not have 40-year employment stints anymore, except in state/federal government or small, cushy companies. And anyone who does software engineering or development, sys-admin, DBA, network engineer role on a serious and professional level knows that all your experience works against you --- and you get too expensive and at the end of the day, most places just won't pay that and take the 2nd or 3rd level person unless you have someone really gunning for your talent.

How is this any different than leaving your job on par-for-the-course reasons and taking a new job? Everyone leaves for a reason. Maybe you were tired of the grind, the work culture, the work itself, who the fuck knows. You never tell them (your employer that) because there are bridges to be preserved (if you're smart) but we all have our reasons, and all have an employment livelihood and that nice-to-us paycheck and living to preserve too.

No one is naive in all of this; people are going to say what they need to say to detatch themselves from this to get a new job or appear to be the stifled do-gooder who was opposed to it but had food to put on the table and squatter box rent to pay for in Silicon Valley. Anyone working at Facebook knows very well what the business model was/is and will be, even in light of all this fake congress BS with Zuckerberg: you

.

Re:Is it really ethical or CYA

[Train0987]

When are you going to accept that YOU and YOUR toxic politics are responsible for Trump being elected? We weren't voting for Trump, we were voting to reject YOU.

Re:Is it really ethical or CYA

[Anonymous Coward]

That is just so wrong, I don't even know where to begin.

First, "SJW" could just as easily mean people on the more conservative side of things who call people "snowflakes" or are pushing for tougher immigration enforcement.

Second, you apparently do not live in the valley, or you'd know what you're saying isn't even remotely the truth. Yes Berkeley and San Francisco can do things that sound crazy when summed up in a headline, but when you start digging into some of the details, you see it is not some knee-jerk response, but they are actually considered decisions made by city leaders. Like banning/taxing of sugary drinks. Sugar is added to all kinds of things where it really has no business being. Hot dogs, for example, have sugar in them. The sugar is put there because food companies know it is a highly addictive substance that is very difficult to kick. This in turn creates a bunch of fat people who have expensive chronic health problems like heart disease. More people with expensive chronic conditions means all of us end up paying more in insurance premiums, because the current insurance system in the US is just a giant pyramid scheme, based on the assumption you'll have more people paying in than you're paying out.

Not to get all tinfoil hat, but food companies put sugar into almost everything because it is a highly addictive substance that is perfectly legal. They do this in order to sell more of their products, not to increase the nutritional value or anything like that.

Aside from that, the valley is one of the most prolific places for new business creation in the country, if not the world. For all some people love to harp about how over regulated California is, the facts show it is one of the most business friendly locations there is. For every company that leaves California, usually having nothing to do with taxes or regulation, there are probably a dozen new startups being created. Sure, most of them will fail, but there will be a dozen more to take their place, and one or two will likely succeed to some degree.

Another thing, is what exactly is wrong with a company deciding that in addition to making a profit, it also wants to contribute something back to society? This was actually a pretty common practice up until maybe the 80s give or take. There used to be "company towns" and taxes paid by companies went to support the local infrastructure in a symbiotic relationship. If a company wants to ship goods, it helps to have roads that are in good repair, and manufacturing goods is generally a lot easier with the help of an electrical grid and sewage system. It's also good to have an educated workforce to replace workers who retire, so supporting schools was important. Then, somewhere along the line, investors started getting greedy and created the myth that companies must do everything they possibly can to maximize the value for shareholders. Now our infrastructure is falling apart and our schools are chronically underfunded. So, I again ask you, what is wrong with a company deciding that they want to emphasize doing some good for the community?

Re:Is it really ethical or CYA

[Anonymous Coward]

Blah blah blah...

Ya they do actually kneejerk reactions all the time. Obama was heralded for using "data from social networks". The Democrats continue to use such data. Suddenly... Now that Trump is elected, it's a BAAAAAAAD thing.

You think they'd be anywhere near as hyper about this if Hillary won and part of the reason was this data? Oh fuck no. Stop lying. There might be some blowback, but no where near the level of what we're seeing.

People in California will literally have a hissy fit if you donate so much as a dollar to a conservative campaign, no matter your reasons for doing so, no matter your allegiances, no matter anything.

And no, I didn't vote for Trump. I've just read numerous stories and have witnessed the hysteria on multiple occasions.

Re:Is it really ethical or CYA

[JackieBrown]

Users will not be leaving facebook at any notable impact. You overestimate how much the average user cares about this stuff or even knows about it

Re:Is it really ethical or CYA

[farble1670]

When are you going to accept that YOU and YOUR toxic politics are responsible for Trump being elected? We weren't voting for Trump, we were voting to reject YOU.

Great. You elected a toxic 'tard that's doing irreparable harm to our nation to counter the vast, VAST minority of liberals that fall into the SJW category? You sir have been fooled by something that's well known to most people. It's called a vocal minority.

Re:Is it really ethical or CYA

[farble1670]

And they were cool with it when it was the Obama campaign scraping the data.

Hi Troll. I see you've reached line item #347 on your list of "Liberal Triggers". This one is pretty weak though. I'd suggest you follow up with #544, which is "Hilary responsible for Benghazi". Good luck!

Re:Is it really ethical or CYA

[Bodhammer]

Maybe they could add a new status called "Virtue Signalling"?

Re:Is it really ethical or CYA

[Train0987]

Tell that to James Damore.

Re:Is it really ethical or CYA

[gnunick]

Yeah it's pretty disingenuous to suddenly pretend you have moral or ethical qualms. It has to have been clear to _anyone_ in the industry for years how fucked up Facebook is, and how amoral their behavior is. The only difference is now that the general public is getting concerned.

I've been rebuffing recruiters from Facebook (among other corporate assholes) for years. Acting ethically (and insisting on working only for companies which don't offend my moral sensibilities), isn't a new concept to me. It does greatly limit one's employment prospects, but on the other hand I've never had trouble finding a job.

Re:Is it really ethical or CYA

[Train0987]

Failed to denounce Nazis? Are you insane? Sorta like "When did you stop beating your wife farble?"

Re:Is it really ethical or CYA

[bobbied]

It was scraping your contacts' public information and keeping it, without your contact's consent and that data was used for more than just allowing the Application's users to target their friends. Facebook helped the Obama campaign in doing this though the Facebook API. The keeping of this data violated Facebook's policy but nobody cared.

The Cambridge Analytica application was a bit more opaque about this, collecting your contacts w/o your direct consent, but to your friends the net effect is the same is it not? Facebook didn't assist CA with their application, but provided the common API that allowed it. Both the collection and keeping of this data violated Facebook's policy, but the API allowed it.

So, yea this was a bit different... But not enough to matter all that much.

Actually, the Facebook assistance to the Obama Campaign with their app might be construed as a violation of campaign finance laws as it was undeclared and not paid services that Facebook usually charged for. I'm not saying it necessarily was an FEC violation, but I would urge caution about pushing this narrative too far by those with political motives. It could easily back fire on you...

Auschwitz guards

[sinij]

I am sure these FB employees were just following the orders, but why act only now? FB practices were well-known even outside of FB, this couldn't possibly be the first time they found out what is happening in the showers.

Re:Auschwitz guards

[sinij]

Considering HQ is in Silicon Valley, it is likely anti-Trump activists, and not newly found moral fortitude or rediscovered respect for privacy that motivates these engineers.

These people do realize...

[forkfail]

... that Facebook's entire business model is based on collecting, using, and selling data and metadata about people?

This sudden appearance of embracing moral behavior and ethics would be hilarious if it wasn't so pathetically self serving and so hypocritically self righteous as to be nauseating.

It's very telling

[Train0987]

How Slashdot and others keep referring to this as the "Cambridge Analytics scandal" as if Facebook's business model is only wrong when one side takes advantage of it.

Re:It's very telling

[Anonymous Coward]

How Slashdot and others keep referring to this as the "Cambridge Analytics scandal" as if Facebook's business model is only wrong when one side takes advantage of it.

Because the "wrong" side took advantage of it.

Re:"Hacking" the Election

[Train0987]

Facebook had ZERO to do with the outcome of the election. Not one Trump voter in the country is now thinking to themselves "wow, Facebook tricked me into voting for Trump!". All of these BS excuses are nothing but delusions to avoid facing the reality of being rejected.