Meta has vehemently denied the allegations in the book. “The book is a “mix of out-of-date and previously reported claims about the company and false accusations about our executives,” a Meta spokesman, Andy Stone, said in a statement. Ms. Wynn-Williams was fired for poor > performance, he added, and an investigation at the time determined that “she made misleading and unfounded allegations of harassment.”
“Meta executives have also responded online to Ms. Wynn-Williams’s claims, calling most of them wildly exaggerated or flat-out false.
The New York Times
So, Meta is trying to shut Sarah Wynn-Williams up.
I’d guess the “wildly exaggerated or flat out false” allegations are the unverifiable ones, and the “out of date” or “previously reported” ones are true. That said. I knew I had to read this book.
I read the book and would say about 92% of it is verifiable. Well written too. Are there criticisms to be made of the book? Sure. But those criticisms have nothing to do with how ugly all this “out of date” or “previously reported” stuff is. I’m not even talking about allegations of harassment or anything in the 8% or so of the book that isn’t verifiable.
My critique is that it glossed over or downright omitted quite a few things that I’m sure Wynn-Williams knew all about. Maybe there are reasons for that, after all the book is supposed to be a memoir of her time there, not a history book about her time there, but I think the book could have been about fifty pages longer than it was. Some things are just glossed over in my humble opinion. I guess I’m just whining that the book wasn’t exactly what I wanted it to be (like so much criticism of everything in the world). My other critique is that some of her problems (also a small percentage, maybe 5%), are self-inflicted and/or have nothing to do with Facebook but are spun as if they have something to do with Facebook. Well, it’s also her memoir, and she’s entitled to tell her story from her point of view her way.
That said, Facebook is an ugly company run by ugly people who suck and are ruining the world. And Sarah Wynn-Williams has written a terrific book that everyone should read. I give this book a Must Read.
I finally read Starship Troopers by Robert Heinlein and thoroughly enjoyed it. Rather than write a review or a critique of a classic that was written in 1959, I'll say that I don't need to agree with everything someone writes to find it enjoyable. I'll also say it's something everyone should read. It wouldn’t be the best use of my time (or yours) to write down all my thoughts here on the book, that’s been done by people far better at that kind of thing than me. And. By people far worse at that than me who I suspect got it totally and completely wrong. I think everyone should read it and come to their own conclusions. I give this book a must read too.
I’ll also say that as much as I love every Verhoeven movie I’ve ever seen, I can see why fans of the book hated that movie. I think what a film based on a book owes to the source material isn’t that it’s literally the book translated to film. But. It does have to take place in that same world, touch on the same themes, and the characters have to behave in the ways they would in the book. If the characters don’t, there better be a good reason for it.
Paul Verhoeven’s Starship Troopers does almost none of those things. It touches on those themes occasionally in a perfunctory way and it’s an entertaining Verhoeven movie, but it is not that book at all. Yet, I don’t have it in me to hate it. I’m too big a Verhoeven fan.
On this day in 1970 (well, yesterday now, I meant to publish this last night. Whoops!) Kurt Vonnegut gave a wide-ranging interview to the BBC. If you haven't read any Vonnegut, you should read some Vonnegut. Slaughterhouse Five and Cat's Cradle are good starting points.
There's no shame in getting around to the things you want to get around to later than you intended to get around to them. Or. Better late than never.
If you’re heading out to the protests today, be SAFE and be LOUD out there!
-Ira
