Policy

Russia’s playing chicken with Facebook

Russia’s restricting Facebook over fact-check labels. Imagine what it'll do now that Facebook deplatformed RT.

The Facebook logo displayed across a smartphone

Completely deplatforming Russia could have consequences.

Photo: Chesnot/Getty Images

In the days since Russia invaded Ukraine, calls have mounted for Facebook and other U.S. tech companies to curb or deplatform Russia’s propaganda arms.

On Friday, Russia sort of beat Facebook to the punch.

The country’s communications regulator announced plans to “partially restrict” Facebook in Russia due to allegations of “censorship” against Russian state media. In reality, Meta’s vice president of Global Affairs Nick Clegg said, the company had simply fact-checked and labeled posts from pages run by Russian outlets. Russia didn’t like that and demanded Facebook remove the labels. Facebook refused. And here we are.

Facebook fact-checks news outlets all over the world. But Russia’s ham-fisted response reveals why banning the country’s state-sponsored social media accounts altogether isn’t so easy.

There’s a good argument to be made that pulling the plug would prevent Russia from continuing to spread lies as a pretext for war — and Meta, at Ukraine’s request, has suspended some Russian state media outlets from its platforms inside Ukraine. (After publication, Meta also said it would block RT and Sputnik throughout the E.U.) “Would you defend the German state’s right to some confused notion of ‘free speech,’ even as Hitler sets out to destroy the lives of millions?” Justin Hendrix of Tech Policy Press wrote last week.

But Russia’s retaliation shows that it’s not just state speech at risk. Fully cutting off the Russian government could spark an even more extreme retaliation that ends up hurting Russian people who oppose the war. Anti-war protests have broken out all over Russia, with Russian nationals rising up against their government’s actions. And they’re using social media not only to share what they’re seeing on the ground, but also to access information that doesn’t come from Russian state sources.

If something as small as fact-check labels could provoke that response, there’s no telling what the government would do if it found itself fully deplatformed. It’s not just Facebook either. Over the weekend, Twitter said some users in Russia were also unable to access its services.

It’s in Russia’s interest to play chicken with Big Tech, of course. By overreacting to a little thing, Russia seems to be betting that Facebook won’t do the big thing — that is, cut off its propaganda machine entirely. If there’s one thing Mark Zuckerberg does seem to truly believe in, it’s that Facebook is an important tool for freedom of expression around the world. If it looks like Russia might cut its people off from that tool at a time when they arguably need it most, it’s easy to see how Meta might opt not to make any drastic moves.

So far, Meta hasn’t caved to Russia’s demands. On Friday night, in fact, it took the added step of preventing Russian state media from running or making money from ads on its platforms. Google and Twitter have done the same. That’s encouraging, given tech giants’ track records.

Last year, Apple and Google removed an app linked to Russian opposition leader Aleksei Navalny from their app stores after Russia reportedly threatened to hold their local staff criminally accountable. Facebook has yielded to government orders in other countries, including in Turkey where it blocked posts from a Kurdish militia group that opposed the government. Facebook told ProPublica at the time that it agreed to block the posts because otherwise it would have been completely shut down in Turkey.

This time, the whole world’s watching— and condemning — Russia. Facebook appears to be relying on that fact to back up its decision. “Ordinary Russians are using Meta's apps to express themselves and organize for action,” Clegg said Friday. “We want them to continue to make their voices heard, share what’s happening, and organize through Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp and Messenger.”

As long as they still can.

This story also appeared in Protocol's Policy newsletter. It has been updated to include additional details about Meta's actions against RT and Sputnik in the E.U.

Fintech

Gavin Newsom shows crypto some California love

“A more flexible approach is needed,” Gov. Newsom said in rejecting a bill that would require crypto companies to get a state license.

Strong bipartisan support wasn’t enough to convince Newsom that requiring crypto companies to register with the state’s Department of Financial Protection and Innovation is the smart path for California.

Photo: Jerod Harris/Getty Images for Vox Media

The Digital Financial Assets Law seemed like a legislative slam dunk in California for critics of the crypto industry.

But strong bipartisan support — it passed 71-0 in the state assembly and 31-6 in the Senate — wasn’t enough to convince Gov. Gavin Newsom that requiring crypto companies to register with the state’s Department of Financial Protection and Innovation is the smart path for California.

Keep Reading Show less
Benjamin Pimentel

Benjamin Pimentel ( @benpimentel) covers crypto and fintech from San Francisco. He has reported on many of the biggest tech stories over the past 20 years for the San Francisco Chronicle, Dow Jones MarketWatch and Business Insider, from the dot-com crash, the rise of cloud computing, social networking and AI to the impact of the Great Recession and the COVID crisis on Silicon Valley and beyond. He can be reached at bpimentel@protocol.com or via Google Voice at (925) 307-9342.

Sponsored Content

Great products are built on strong patents

Experts say robust intellectual property protection is essential to ensure the long-term R&D required to innovate and maintain America's technology leadership.

Every great tech product that you rely on each day, from the smartphone in your pocket to your music streaming service and navigational system in the car, shares one important thing: part of its innovative design is protected by intellectual property (IP) laws.

From 5G to artificial intelligence, IP protection offers a powerful incentive for researchers to create ground-breaking products, and governmental leaders say its protection is an essential part of maintaining US technology leadership. To quote Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo: "intellectual property protection is vital for American innovation and entrepreneurship.”

Keep Reading Show less
James Daly
James Daly has a deep knowledge of creating brand voice identity, including understanding various audiences and targeting messaging accordingly. He enjoys commissioning, editing, writing, and business development, particularly in launching new ventures and building passionate audiences. Daly has led teams large and small to multiple awards and quantifiable success through a strategy built on teamwork, passion, fact-checking, intelligence, analytics, and audience growth while meeting budget goals and production deadlines in fast-paced environments. Daly is the Editorial Director of 2030 Media and a contributor at Wired.
Workplace

Slack’s rallying cry at Dreamforce: No more meetings

It’s not all cartoon bears and therapy pigs — work conferences are a good place to talk about the future of work.

“We want people to be able to work in whatever way works for them with flexible schedules, in meetings and out of meetings,” Slack chief product officer Tamar Yehoshua told Protocol at Dreamforce 2022.

Photo: Marlena Sloss/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Dreamforce is primarily Salesforce’s show. But Slack wasn’t to be left out, especially as the primary connector between Salesforce and the mainstream working world.

The average knowledge worker spends more time using a communication tool like Slack than a CRM like Salesforce, positioning it as the best Salesforce product to concern itself with the future of work. In between meeting a therapy pig and meditating by the Dreamforce waterfall, Protocol sat down with several Slack execs and conference-goers to chat about the shifting future.

Keep Reading Show less
Lizzy Lawrence

Lizzy Lawrence ( @LizzyLaw_) is a reporter at Protocol, covering tools and productivity in the workplace. She's a recent graduate of the University of Michigan, where she studied sociology and international studies. She served as editor in chief of The Michigan Daily, her school's independent newspaper. She's based in D.C., and can be reached at llawrence@protocol.com.

LA is a growing tech hub. But not everyone may fit.

LA has a housing crisis similar to Silicon Valley’s. And single-family-zoning laws are mostly to blame.

As the number of tech companies in the region grows, so does the number of tech workers, whose high salaries put them at an advantage in both LA's renting and buying markets.

Photo: Nat Rubio-Licht/Protocol

LA’s tech scene is on the rise. The number of unicorn companies in Los Angeles is growing, and the city has become the third-largest startup ecosystem nationally behind the Bay Area and New York with more than 4,000 VC-backed startups in industries ranging from aerospace to creators. As the number of tech companies in the region grows, so does the number of tech workers. The city is quickly becoming more and more like Silicon Valley — a new startup and a dozen tech workers on every corner and companies like Google, Netflix, and Twitter setting up offices there.

But with growth comes growing pains. Los Angeles, especially the burgeoning Silicon Beach area — which includes Santa Monica, Venice, and Marina del Rey — shares something in common with its namesake Silicon Valley: a severe lack of housing.

Keep Reading Show less
Nat Rubio-Licht

Nat Rubio-Licht is a Los Angeles-based news writer at Protocol. They graduated from Syracuse University with a degree in newspaper and online journalism in May 2020. Prior to joining the team, they worked at the Los Angeles Business Journal as a technology and aerospace reporter.

Policy

SFPD can now surveil a private camera network funded by Ripple chair

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors approved a policy that the ACLU and EFF argue will further criminalize marginalized groups.

SFPD will be able to temporarily tap into private surveillance networks in certain circumstances.

Photo: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

Ripple chairman and co-founder Chris Larsen has been funding a network of security cameras throughout San Francisco for a decade. Now, the city has given its police department the green light to monitor the feeds from those cameras — and any other private surveillance devices in the city — in real time, whether or not a crime has been committed.

This week, San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors approved a controversial plan to allow SFPD to temporarily tap into private surveillance networks during life-threatening emergencies, large events, and in the course of criminal investigations, including investigations of misdemeanors. The decision came despite fervent opposition from groups, including the ACLU of Northern California and the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which say the police department’s new authority will be misused against protesters and marginalized groups in a city that has been a bastion for both.

Keep Reading Show less
Issie Lapowsky

Issie Lapowsky ( @issielapowsky) is Protocol's chief correspondent, covering the intersection of technology, politics, and national affairs. She also oversees Protocol's fellowship program. Previously, she was a senior writer at Wired, where she covered the 2016 election and the Facebook beat in its aftermath. Prior to that, Issie worked as a staff writer for Inc. magazine, writing about small business and entrepreneurship. She has also worked as an on-air contributor for CBS News and taught a graduate-level course at New York University's Center for Publishing on how tech giants have affected publishing.

Latest Stories
Bulletins