Facebook Isn’t Making Any Friends on Capitol Hill

“They’re very good at running out the clock on you.”

Tom Williams/Congressional Quarterly/Newscom/ZUMA Press

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Facebook aggravated officials on Capitol Hill during a set of year-end conference calls meant to help contain fallout from a bombshell New York Times report detailing previously undisclosed deals allowing outside companies access to user data, including private messages.

Congressional aides who participated in the calls with staff and members of the House Tech Accountability Caucus, staffers of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and staff of the Senate commerce committee said they felt frustrated by Facebookā€™s lack of answers in the briefings.

ā€œTheyā€™re very good at running out the clock on you. They get on the line, they do their intro, they talk for 15 minutes without stopping. Then you ask your question, then they spend 10 minutes answering, and before you know it, the call is over,ā€ one aide told Mother Jones.

Four congressional sources Mother Jones spoke with, who requested anonymity to speak frankly, said Facebook often provided unsatisfying or incomplete answers when pressed by lawmakers and their staff. When Rep. Robin Kelly (D-Ill.) asked what the company was doing with users’ private messages, according to an aide on the call, Facebook responded that it doesn’t do anything users donā€™t allow.

ā€œThat didnā€™t answer the question,ā€ the aide said.

In other instances, staffers said, Facebook didn’t provide answers on straightforward issues of data privacy, despite the calls being arranged specifically to address data privacy. In one call, Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.) asked how the company determines whether third-party developers it shared data with have adequate data protections, but, according to an aide on the call, the company’s representatives said they would have to get back in touch with an answer.

Facebook declined to comment for this story.

Congressional staff describe a repeated push and pull process of trying to extract answers from Facebook in the wake of new revelations, noting that they can feel misled as Facebook discloses information not included in previous briefings.

ā€œFacebook looks like they’re running from one crisis to the next,ā€ one of the aides said. ā€œThey know they have to respond. The information they tell us each time appears inconsistent. It looks incomplete and inaccurate. My impression is that theyā€™re either deliberately obfuscating, or they donā€™t totally understand and canā€™t articulate their own practices.ā€

As an example, the aide pointed to the Times‘ revealing of Facebook data-sharing partnerships with companies like Netflix, Spotify, and Amazon, which the company had not told Congress about despite relevant requests. “The partnerships had never been identified to Congress before,ā€ the same aide noted. ā€œFor us, itā€™s been a sort of slow drip of information in response to a new news story.”

Complicating the matter, congressional staffers said, is Facebook internal jargon that can make it hard to probe for details. One aide explained that while Facebook had previously disclosed to Congress many of its data partnerships with device makers like Blackberry and Samsung, it didn’t mention several data partnerships with media companies like Netflix and Spotify that the company later told Capitol Hill it categorized separately. The aide said congressional staff often donā€™t know what company-specific terms to use, making it harder to thoroughly question Facebook officials.

Facebook representatives, according to the sources, suggested that future potential data privacy scandals could ensue as old policies come to light. Facebook representatives on the calls included top policy officials Steve Satterfield and Kevin Martin.

The calls came after members of the Tech Accountability Caucusā€”which was formed last year to address growing criticism of the sectorā€”in an effort led by Kelly, began circulating a letter among members of Congress that was later sent to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg. The letter, provided to Mother Jones, asks Zuckerberg for a dialogue with lawmakers on Facebook’s sharing of user data with outside companies and users’ ability to control how their data is passed around. Signatories included Reps. Kelly, Clarke, Daniel Lipinski (Ill.), Bonnie Watson Coleman (N.J.), Hank Johnson (Ga.), and Darren Soto (Fla.)ā€”all Democrats.

Facebookā€™s responses on the calls are in line with a broader pattern of “delay, deny and deflect,” as outlined in a November Times story detailing how Facebook tried to downplay negative revelations over the past year. With each high profile misstep, the story explained, Facebook vowed to do better publicly, while privately focusing on minimizing the public relations impact of its mistakes at the expense of taking action to address the issues.

Aides hope that communication with the company will improve. Facebook has offered to give a briefing that would elucidate its data-sharing processes more thoroughly, but this has yet to happen, one staffer said, because of the holidays and shutdown.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate