- Sarah Wynn-Williams’s memoir contains details about her experiences working at Facebook, now Meta.
- The Careless People author spoke with BI about how and why she wrote the book.
- Meta has since won a ruling barring Wynn-Williams from promoting the book.
Hours before an arbitrator ruled in Meta’s favor, barring Sarah Wynn-Williams from promoting her explosive new tell-all about the company, she sat down for an interview with Business Insider. Careless People: A Cautionary Tale of Power, Greed, and Lost Idealism, released Tuesday, is a scathing memoir detailing Wynn-Williams’ time at Facebook, now Meta, where she worked in global public policy from 2011 to 2017.
The book seemed to materialize out of nowhere, announced less than a week before its release. And yet, it had all the makings of a bombshell.
Wynn-Williams describes an internal culture built on power, deference, and secrecy, where Mark Zuckerberg’s employees allegedly let him win at board games, where executives reportedly bent over backward to court the Chinese government, and where she claims Meta’s top policy executive, Joel Kaplan, sexually harassed her. (Meta has denied the allegations about Kaplan, saying an internal investigation found them “misleading” and “unfounded.” The company cleared Kaplan in 2017. Meta also published a document stating that some of Wynn-Williams’ claims in the book about Meta’s China and Myanmar operations were “old news”).
Earlier this month, Wynn-Williams also filed a whistleblower complaint with the SEC over Meta’s dealings in China, alleging the company misled investors, and went to great lengths to please the Chinese government in a failed attempt to launch Facebook in the country.
“This is all pushed by an employee terminated eight years ago for poor performance. We do not operate our services in China today,” a Meta Spokesperson said.
“It is no secret we were once interested in doing so as part of Facebook’s effort to connect the world. This was widely reported beginning a decade ago. We ultimately opted not to go through with the ideas we’d explored, which Mark Zuckerberg announced in 2019.”
After leaving Meta, Wynn-Williams shifted her focus to AI policy, including participating in a dialogue between US and Chinese experts on AI and military risks.
Since its release, Careless People has made headlines and drawn a swift, aggressive response from Meta. Multiple current and former employees, including some featured in the book, have publicly disputed Wynn-Williams’ claims, calling them exaggerated or false. The company has gone after her in an unprecedented way, arguing that she violated a nondisparagement agreement and securing an emergency arbitration ruling that restricts her ability to speak publicly about the book.
“This book is a mix of out-of-date and previously reported claims about the company and false accusations about our executives,” a Meta spokesperson said in a statement.
“Sarah Wynn-Williams was fired for poor performance and toxic behavior, and an investigation at the time determined she made misleading and unfounded allegations of harassment. Since then, she has been paid by anti-Facebook activists, and this is simply a continuation of that work,” the statement continued. “Whistleblower status protects communications to the government, not disgruntled activists trying to sell books.”
When reached for comment about the arbitration ruling, a legal representative for Wynn-Williams said: “Because of an order dated 12 March sought by Meta, Ms Wynn-Williams has been prevented from providing comment.”
Flatiron Books, Wynn-William’s publisher, provided BI with the following statement: “The arbitration order has no impact on Macmillan. However, we are appalled by Meta’s tactics to silence our author through the use of a non-disparagement clause in a severance agreement.”
“To be clear”, Marlena Bittner, the publisher’s director of publicity told BI, “the arbitrator’s order makes no reference to the claims within Careless People. The book went through a thorough editing and vetting process, and we remain committed to publishing important books such as this. We will absolutely continue to support and promote it.”
Wynn-Williams avoided directly answering some of BI’s questions about the company’s accusations against her.
Partly driven by the buzz generated by Meta’s own attempts to suppress it, Careless People ranked among the top 10 bestsellers on Amazon in the US when this article was published.
Below are excerpts from BI’s interview with Wynn-Williams, edited for clarity.
A lot of people were surprised when this book was announced. Why did you keep it under wraps?
Well, if you see the reaction that’s happened since, I think that explains the decision. When I decided to tell my story and speak out about all these true experiences that are in the book, I wanted to make sure that the story would be out there.
It seems crazy when we live in a world where Meta is doubling down on freedom of expression and purports to be about supporting free speech. I thought: I want this out in the world—and so that’s part of the reason for doing it that way.
You left Facebook in 2017. Why did you decide to release it now, after all these years?
Because I think we’re on the cusp of this new era of technology. We’re stepping into this AI era, and at a high level, I don’t want the mistakes that were made during the social media era to be applied to the AI era.
One of the things that I’ve worked on since leaving [Meta] is the US-China AI dialogue on AI in weapons. So, I really understand the existential nature of AI. I also understand these people and how decisions are made. That’s why, as we go into this new era, we have to do it better. China is such a big part of the story of AI. It’s this growing strategic rivalry and how technology is so central to that rivalry.
And yet, this company has been doing things in the shadows for so long with the Chinese Communist Party, and their line is, oh, you know, we tried to get our services [into China] and we told you in 2019 that didn’t happen. Have a look at how much of [Meta’s] revenue comes from China — it’s $18 billion.
(Editor’s note: According to Meta’s 2024 annual report, the company made $18.35 billion from China, primarily through resellers serving Chinese advertisers targeting global users.) So it seems that everyone is operating under the false notion that Meta is not operating in China when actually, it is fundamental to its current valuation, it’s fundamental to its future growth. And we don’t talk openly about it at the very time that we’re about to enter this new AI era.
What was your process for writing this book? How long did it take you?
The process was off and on. It was something that I felt there was a growing need and importance [for]. It’s a memoir; it’s my story; and it’s a true story that is also underpinned by evidence, and, further to that, underpinned [by my] filing with the SEC.
[My writing process] wasn’t a linear thing. There were moments when something would happen, there would be a headline about China, and I’d think, “It would be so different if people knew the truth.” Or there’d be a headline about something bad happening with teens using Instagram, and I’d think “Oh God.” The story they were telling was departing more and more from the truth and it seemed more and more imperative that the truth was out there.
Meta spokesperson Andy Stone has said that your book wasn’t fact-checked and that nobody reached out to Meta for comment. Did you get the book fact-checked?
I think Meta’s problem is using this to not answer the questions themselves. What I would love is for us not to fall into the distraction. There’s a real risk that we talk about things that don’t matter. We’ve got these huge issues like China and I notice they’re not providing any detail on that. There are so many smart people who’ve worked at this company and who are covering this company. Like, we have to do better.
A lot of current and former Meta employees have contested the claims in your book and said that they’re fabricated or exaggerated. How do you respond to those statements?
Again, this is another distraction from talking about the things that Meta has done and the hypocrisy around that. It’s making the conversation about them and their response, not about the true stories in this book that people need to know.
Have you personally heard from any current or former Meta employees since the book came out?
So many, and it’s been so nice. I realize there are some very decent people who have worked at Meta and it’s been amazing. The support has been incredible. I am very touched. I am very grateful. There are people who were in the trenches who had lived these stories with me, who were the ones raising eyebrows when stuff was feeling like “Oh, is this really happening?” It means a lot that they recognize the truth of the story and they also see themselves in it and as part of it.
Has Meta changed its ways since you’ve left? Do you see any difference in the way the company operates or in how senior management thinks about some of the issues that you bring up in the book?
I sit where I sit, but I see exactly the same behavior. I see a company that says it has changed all its accounts for teens, has a big push on that, and yet, hasn’t grappled with [questions] like: Are you still gathering information about when teenagers are feeling worthless? What data are you giving to advertisers about 13 to 17-year-olds? Where are you surveilling teens on and off the platform? Go and ask them those specific questions and then see if it’s the same company or a different company. See if you get answers that satisfy you.
I think broadly the tech press does continue to ask these questions of Meta.
Do you feel like you get straight answers?
You sometimes do.
That’s part of why I wrote this. Use it to ask the questions, and you’ll have the truth in your hands. You can go back on each of these things and say, like, “You know, show us the documents, show us the truth.”
You worked closely with Mark Zuckerberg. I’m curious what you think about his transformation over the last year where he’s trying to look cool and more accessible, wearing chains, and doing mixed martial arts.
Mark Zuckerberg has worn many different costumes and he continues to wear many different costumes. In my time at Facebook, he was cozying up with the Chinese Communist Party. Now he’s cozying up with President Trump. It’s one of the many costumes, and it’s all in service of more power to Mark Zuckerberg — whether it’s promoting President Xi and asking him to name your first-born child and learn Mandarin or now this moment [where] it’s wrestling and wearing chains. Let’s see it for what it is.
What do you make of Meta moving away from fact-checking on its platforms and getting rid of DEI initiatives?
Don’t you think it’s ironic that they’re pivoting away from fact-checking and yet one of your questions to me was all about fact-checking at the behest of the Meta spokesperson? The hypocrisy is so outrageous. People need to read the book, understand the truth, and then say, “No, we know who you are — stop it.”
Meta has released a statement saying that you were fired for poor performance and toxic behavior. They’ve called your allegations “misleading” and “unfounded”. They’ve said that you’re being paid by anti-Facebook activists.
They’re trying to smear me and convince people not to read the book. People should read the book. The truth is in the book. They can make up their own minds. I stand by everything in the book. It’s true, and that’s what the focus should be on.
The focus should be on China. It should be on what they’re doing with teens. It should be on genocide and Myanmar. These are really serious issues. That’s where the discussion needs to be. I can’t overstate how much more important each of those things is.
So, just for the record: you’re not being paid by anti-Facebook activists, right?
I’m not being paid by anyone!
They’re also gearing up to take legal action against Macmillan, your publisher.
It’s a surprising choice, to the extent that they’re a “freedom of expression” company.
People should be asking questions about their commitment to freedom of expression. People should be asking questions about their principles and their values and their actions, as always, are so different from their words. People need to focus on their actions. Don’t get distracted. Look at what they do, not at what they say.
Correction: An earlier version of this story misstated the year Wynn-Williams’ employment with Facebook ended. Wynn-Williams told BI that she was on payroll until 2018. A Meta spokesperson said that although she received her severance in 2018, her employment ended in 2017.
Have a tip? Contact this reporter via email at [email protected] or Signal at +1-408-905-9124. Use a personal email address and a nonwork device; here’s our guide to sharing information securely.
Read the full article here
