Tech billionaires are so deep in their very own actuality distortion fields that their notion of the world can get dangerously warped.
That’s the conclusion I drew from studying Sarah Wynn-Williams’ astonishing memoir about her time working international coverage at Meta Platforms. The corporate has sought to dam its publication, providing a case research within the Streisand impact and vaulting Careless Individuals to the highest of the charts on Amazon.com.
The e-book chimed with what I beforehand heard from former Meta executives concerning the firm’s hypocrisy, its obsessive drive for development and CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s fixation on growing a fanbase. However Wynn-Williams’ vantage level in his internal orbit and that of and former chief working officer Sheryl Sandberg, detailing the facility they wielded, additionally highlighted a dire want for limits to some tech management tenures.
Wynn-Williams doesn’t supply solutions, however right here’s one: no single particular person ought to lead a platform for billions of customers for greater than a decade, by no means thoughts greater than 20 years as Zuckerberg has performed. Over time and amid a string of political leaders coming into and exiting energy, he has been a relentless presence, a monarch in a hoodie. Maybe he wants a break similar to them.
Wynn-Williams was at Fb from 2011 to 2018. She persuaded early executives to make her the corporate’s first head of world coverage as a result of she believed in Fb as a drive for good. Over time, she watched with indifferent and horrified fascination as Zuckerberg exercised his rising energy. She was in his non-public jet when a coverage director defined how the corporate possible helped Donald Trump clinch his first presidential election in 2016.
All the facility
Zuckerberg would give speeches to heads of state whose international locations’ annual financial output paled compared to Fb’s personal income, and slightly than talk about nationwide points he’d speak of presiding over a “international neighborhood”. And it was clear that presidents and prime ministers accepted that energy imbalance. They incessantly requested him if Fb may put its thumb on the size to garner extra political assist, Wynn-Williams writes, and when Zuckerberg spoke at a world summit after Trump’s win, they requested him not concerning the unfold of conspiracy theories and polarisation on his website, however softball questions on civic engagement. “Trump’s election elevated Mark of their eyes,” Wynn-Williams writes.
Learn: Zuckerberg says firms want extra ‘masculine vitality’
Within the e-book, Zuckerberg handles all this energy in the way in which many would anticipate. He needed extra. He requested his advisers about working for president and spent a 12 months in travelling throughout America in 2017 to satisfy residents in swing states. Few people in historical past have amassed this a lot wealth (US$204-billion as of the time of writing for Zuckerberg) or the flexibility to affect billions of individuals without delay. To not point out a stomach-churning circle of sycophants. Sandberg’s advisers showered her with reward after a speech, even after texting one another about how boring it was, and so they let Zuckerberg win at board video games, in response to Wynn-Williams.
The billionaires finally get bored, the memoir reveals, with Zuckerberg glassy eyed at presidential conferences and Sandberg, writer of Lean In, uninterested when her workers repeatedly inform her about hundreds of girls protesting in Washington in 2017, shortly after Trump’s inauguration.
Wynn-Williams was banned by a court docket order from selling her e-book, however she did handle to report a podcast interview with Bari Weiss, founding father of media firm The Free Press. When requested to take a position on Zuckerberg’s mindset, she says that he “appears on the world prefer it’s a giant board sport, prefer it’s a sport of Threat”.
To that finish, increasing his territory into China turned an obsession. It promised spectacular development and nonetheless does immediately — between 2023 and 2024, Meta’s China income elevated 34% to $18.4-billion. Wynn-Williams’ e-book consists of inner memos discussing the particular entry Fb proposed giving to the Chinese language Communist Celebration. Fb managers admit at one level that passing information of dissident Chinese language Fb customers to the CCP “may result in dying, torture and incarceration”. Did that make Fb’s workers uncomfortable? No, says Wynn-Williams, due to the broader results of Zuckerberg’s actuality distortion area.
Learn: New Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan has a historical past as a profitable underdog
The issue of such extremely concentrated energy is that the value of a single particular person’s questionable resolution is paid at scale. Fb shouldn’t have morphed into Meta, as an illustration. It could have made extra enterprise sense to experiment with digital actuality as a aspect venture. However Zuckerberg has majority voting management over his firm, and so his thought to pivot to VR is costing the corporate $100-billion, with little apparent upside. Sarcastically, he barely talks concerning the metaverse now. He talked about the time period twice throughout his newest quarterly earnings name, in contrast with 15 instances when he was extra enthusiastic about it two years in the past.
Worse is when highly effective tech billionaires go off the rails. Elon Musk’s on-line behaviour turned extra reactionary and troll-like across the time he purchased Twitter. He has focused his critics with bans and lawsuits, unfold conspiracy theories and made impulsive coverage modifications which have pushed away advertisers. Whereas thousands and thousands of individuals have ditched the location, Musk’s affect (not least now within the White Home) means he has reworked a significant social platform and on-line discourse.
However we tolerate such behaviour partially due to expectations laid in Silicon Valley of giving tech founders the time, area and cash they should pursue their imaginative and prescient, regardless of how loopy it appears. Such concepts result in founder worship, and Zuckerberg, Sandberg, Musk and others exist in echo chambers largely insulated from criticism.
Unchecked energy
It doesn’t need to be that manner. Shareholders or regulators ought to demand limits on founders who oversee these platforms to stop the fact distortion that a long time of unchecked energy can convey. Effectively-run democracies have time period limits for his or her management, and whereas company CEOs don’t, the unprecedented societal affect that tech leaders have requires some kind of cutoff level. It’s a radical proposition and would take a mixture of shareholder activism, voluntary governance reform and probably even regulation to make it occur.
Learn: Elon Musk consolidates energy as xAI swallows X
However think about the unprecedented international affect some tech firms now have, not solely as the biggest public corporations in historical past however of their potential to have an effect on the psychological well-being and data environments of billions of individuals. CEOs in shopper items, automotive and even finance don’t wield such energy. But firms like Google, OpenAI and Meta make up a brand new class that calls for proportional oversight in the identical manner monetary corporations face particular rules due to their systemic affect. Novel types of energy require novel checks and balances. And as synthetic intelligence appears to be simply as transformative as social media, we’d do effectively to stop it from changing into additional concentrated and unchecked. — (c) 2025 Bloomberg LP
Get breaking information from TechCentral on WhatsApp. Join right here.
Don’t miss:
From metaverse mess to AI powerhouse: Zuckerberg’s comeback is full
