What the Zuck?

Remember the mid-1990s, when tobacco companies were outed by employees for hiding years' worth of research on the harmful effects of cigarette-smoking? Facebook is having that moment. Frances Haugen, a former employee of the social media colossus, filed complaints with the Securities and Exchange Commission last month alleging that Facebook's own research shows that it amplifies hate, misinformation, and political unrest—but the company hides what it knows. The data scientist revealed herself on "60 Minutes" last night as the whistleblower who leaked thousands of pages of internal company documents to the media and the feds.

• — "Facebook over and over again has shown it chooses profit over safety." Haugen says evidence shows that the company is lying to the public about making significant progress against hate, violence, and misinformation on the platform. One internal study she found, from this year, says, "We estimate that we may action as little as 3-5% of hate and about 6-tenths of 1% of V & I [violence and incitement] on Facebook despite being the best in the world at it."
•  
• — Recruited by FB in 2019, Haugen was assigned to Civic Integrity, which worked on election risks like misinformation. But after the 2020 election, the department was dissolved. "They basically said, 'Oh good, we made it through the election. There wasn't riots…,'" she said. "Fast forward a couple months, we got the insurrection. And when they got rid of Civic Integrity, it was the moment where I was like, 'I don't trust that they're willing to actually invest what needs to be invested to keep Facebook from being dangerous.'"
•  
• — "That really feels like a betrayal of democracy to me." Haugen says FB understood the danger to the 2020 election, so it turned on safety systems to reduce misinformation—but those changes were temporary. "Facebook has realized that if they change the algorithm to be safer, people will spend less time on the site, they'll click on less ads, they'll make less money," she said. Haugen is set to testify about Facebook before Congress this week. Stay tuned. —CBS News

Gehrke: Move over, Mike Lee?

"We're about to witness a very interesting test of Utah's political status quo. Evan McMullin, who won more than 21% of Utahns' votes for president in 2016, will challenge Sen. Mike Lee as an independent candidate for Utah's Senate seat next year. An announcement of his candidacy is likely to come soon—perhaps very soon—a source in the McMullin camp told me over the weekend. If McMullin is elected…it could pose the most definitive rebuke to date to Donald Trump's Republican Party and serve notice to leaders of both parties that there is a wide swath of American voters who care less about cultish partisan allegiances and more about results." —Robert Gehrke in The Salt Lake Tribune

Robert Gehrke is a Salt Lake Tribune news columnist covering government and politics in Utah and the West.

MORE: Democrats set to lose control of Senate in 2022, polling suggests —Newsweek

'An undermining of the nation's national security process'

A bitter fight with Sen. Ted Cruz over a Russian gas pipeline has created what the White House is calling a personnel crisis. Cruz is almost single-handedly delaying dozens of State Department nominees, including 59 would-be ambassadors. He can't block nominees on his own, but he can slow the process by objecting to the Senate's traditional practice of confirming uncontroversial nominees by "unanimous consent." The tactic means that each nominee requires hours of Senate floor time while other legislative priorities compete for attention. Democrats say Cruz's actions are an abuse of the nomination process and are endangering national security at a time when only about a quarter of key national security positions have been filled. —The New York Times

MORE: Steve Bannon said GOP 'shock troops' would be ready to take over administrative state —Insider

NYT Ed Board: Fix this law before 2024

"A small minority of legal scholars have argued that key parts of the Electoral Count Act are unconstitutional, which was the basis of Mr. Eastman's claim that Mr. Pence could simply disregard the law and summarily reject electors of certain key battleground states. Nothing in the Constitution or federal law gives the vice president this authority. The job of the vice president is to open the envelopes and read out the results, nothing more. Any reform to the Electoral Count Act should start there, by making it explicit that the vice president's role on Jan. 6 is purely ministerial and doesn't include the power to rule on disputes over electors. The law should also be amended to allow states more time to arrive at a final count, so that any legal disputes can be resolved before the electors cast their ballots." —The New York Times

MORE: Jan. 6 panel braces for collision with Trump —Politico

Mampilly: A world of discontent

"[T]he continuing protests in both poor and wealthy countries cannot simply be explained away as reactions to the pandemic. The presence of simultaneous uprisings in countries with a range of income levels, government types, and geopolitical significance indicates a deeper disillusionment: the loss of faith in the social contract that shapes relations between governments and their people. Put simply, the governments of today seem incapable of offering both representative and effective governance. And ordinary citizens have had enough." —Zachariah Mampilly in The New York Times

Zachariah Mampilly is a professor at the Marxe School of Public and International Affairs at the City University of New York, and is the co-author of "Africa Uprising: Popular Protest and Political Change."

MORE: Nine are dead after farmer protest in India escalates —NPR

Focus on the Pandora Papers

So what exactly are the Pandora Papers? They're a leak of financial records that reveal the offshore financial assets of dozens of current and former world leaders and hundreds of politicians from Asia and the Middle East to Latin America. The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists obtained the 11.9 million confidential documents from 14 separate legal and financial services firms, which the group said offered "a sweeping look at an industry that helps the world's ultrawealthy, powerful government officials…conceal trillions of dollars from tax authorities, prosecutors, and others."

• — Moving money through offshore accounts, in mostly low-tax jurisdictions, is legal in most countries, and many of the people named aren't accused of criminal wrongdoing. But the journalist group says the data dump shows that the "offshore money machine operates in every corner of the planet, including the world's largest democracies," and involves some of the world's most well-known banks and legal firms.
•  
• — What are some of the revelations? Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babis moved $22 million through offshore companies to secretly buy an estate on the French Riviera. Azerbaijan's ruling Aliyev family traded $540 million worth of UK properties in recent years, one of which was scooped up by Queen Elizabeth II's Crown Estate. Members of Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan's inner circle own an array of companies and trusts holding millions of dollars of hidden wealth. And though he isn't named directly, Vladimir Putin is linked to secret assets in Monaco, including a waterfront home acquired by a Russian woman who reportedly had a child with him. Well, well.

1. — And what about the U.S.? The papers reveal America's "expanding complicity in the offshore economy" by shining a light on the role of South Dakota, Nevada, and other states that have adopted financial secrecy laws that "rival those of offshore jurisdictions." For example, a former vice president of the Dominican Republic finalized several trusts in South Dakota to quietly store his personal wealth and shares of one of the country's largest sugar producers. —Bloomberg

SLPD Ed Board: Lies are creating a volatile situation

"Republicans who still care about democracy need to ask themselves how much of this destructive talk is enough, and whether the stolen-election drumbeat by candidates and elected officials—who know better—is encouraging talk among rank-and-file Republicans to support acts of political violence. Republican politicians are playing with a loaded gun, recklessly aiming it at America's democratic future." —St. Louis Post-Dispatch

MORE: False election claims undermine efforts to increase security —The Hill

I finally did it! After increasing disillusionment with the Republican Party over the last five years, voting for a Democratic presidential candidate for my first time last November, and first considering a change on Jan. 6 of this year, the recent actions of the Senate Republican leadership with regard to holding our nation's credit-worthiness hostage so they can blame everything on the Democrats in a hope to regain majority power has led me to finally make a change. 

The current Republican Party no longer values the things it once did—the things I still do, including integrity, responsibility, and the Constitution. They are partly responsible for the current budget and deficit, but they now want to stick it to the other party and blame them for overspending and the disasters that come if they don't work together on the budget and spending. They claim to be pro-life by restricting abortion as much as possible while banning, blocking, and questioning much of the scientifically proven solutions to slowing the spread of the coronavirus, resulting in needless deaths. In essence, they are saying we care more about an unborn child than we do about anyone living. The only thing they seem to really care about is reclaiming and keeping power.

As of last night, I am an unaffiliated voter. I'm now waiting for ranked-choice voting to come to my state. —Keith R., Oregon

The views expressed in "What's Your Take?" are submitted by readers and do not necessarily reflect the views of the editorial staff or the Stand Up Republic Foundation.