On with Kara Swisher - Mark Zuckerberg: Oops!...I Did It Again

Episode Date: January 30, 2023

When Meta announced Donald Trump would be allowed back on Facebook and Instagram, it wasn’t the company’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg who made the decision. He punted. So why is an executive who holds such control hiding from the power he has amassed? Kara has some ideas — she’s covered Mark from the jump, seen him sweat through interviews and gotten Mark to say things he probably wishes he hadn’t. So today, we then turn the tables and Kara Swisher is On with Nayeema Raza.  Together, Nayeema and Kara unpack an oral history of a company that, for far too long, hid behind the idea of being a small start-up and used that excuse to shamelessly make — and shamelessly repeat — costly mistakes. They journey through the first days of Facebook, examine how the company has navigated controversies from Cambridge Analytica to the Trump decision… and get a sense of why Kara will probably never get to interview Mark again.  You can find Kara and Nayeema on Twitter @karaswisher and @nayeema. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Support for this show comes from Constant Contact. If you struggle just to get your customers to notice you, Constant Contact has what you need to grab their attention. Constant Contact's award-winning marketing platform offers all the automation, integration, and reporting tools that get your marketing running seamlessly, all backed by their expert live customer support. It's time to get going and growing with Constant Contact today.

Ready, set, grow. Go to ConstantContact.ca and start your free trial today. Go to ConstantContact.ca for your free trial. ConstantContact.ca Do you feel like your leads never lead anywhere? And you're making content that no one sees? And it takes forever to build a campaign? Well, that's why we built HubSpot.

It's an AI-powered customer platform that builds campaigns for you, tells you which leads are worth knowing, and makes writing blogs, creating videos, and posting on social a breeze. So now, it's easier than ever to be a marketer. Get started at HubSpot.com slash marketers. Hi, everyone from New York Magazine and the Vox Media Podcast Network. This is Too Hot to Handle, Trump Reinstatement with special guest Nick Clegg. Just kidding. He's neither hot nor does anyone want to handle him. This is On with Kara Swisher and I'm Kara Swisher.

And I'm Naima Raza. And Nick Clegg, of course, is the meta executive who made the decision to reinstate Donald Trump's Facebook account. That was announced on Wednesday. And he is sadly not here with us today. No, they never do interviews with us. And we're going to find out why today. Yeah. What did you do? Who knows? They don't get any benefit from talking to me, I guess. And that's what I'm looking for. You've covered Meta for over 15 years.

Yeah, at least. Since it was called the Facebook, and since Mark was but a child. He wasn't a child. He was a young man, but yes. So in this episode, we're going to unpack the Donald Trump decision, but we're also going to unpack how Facebook and Mark went from being a baby to a behemoth. And we're doing things a little bit differently today. You, Kara Swisher, are on with me. Are you excited? I'm totally excited to talk about Mark Zuckerberg. We did one of these with Elon, but I think this is even more interesting to me because while you've interviewed both of these tech titans several times, you've covered Facebook a lot more deeply than you've covered Tesla. Yes, absolutely. I didn't cover

Tesla very much, but Facebook I've been covering since the beginning and quite extensively back in the early days. I wrote every day about Facebook, I think, at one point. I'm sorry. Yeah, that's okay. And I always injected sort of my opinion into it or my analysis, really. Yeah. So let's start with the Donald Trump's decision. Sure. And then zoom out from it to unpack how meta got so powerful and how Mark has grappled with all this power or hasn't. Yeah, he hasn't. I don't know. He hasn't from the beginning, I think. People don't realize this, but his hero is Augustus Caesar. He's talked about it

in other interviews. And I think he likes being in charge and at the same time doesn't like what comes with being in charge. That was always my impression. He had to always state really clearly that he was in charge. Didn't he have these business cards? I remember these business cards that said, I'm CEO, bitch. Yes, I have one. I thought it was really juvenile when he did it. And at the bottom of Facebook on the page, it was a Mark Zuckerberg production at the bottom of every page of Facebook in the early days, which was so narcissistic in so many ways. And the, which was so narcissistic in so many ways.

And the I am a CEO bitch was juvenile and showed his inexperience. It was ridiculous. We should make you a card. I'm Kara Swisher, bitch. No, thank you. I would never do that. I know you wouldn't. It's implied. It's implied.

It was interesting. He was super insecure because he was so young too, by the way. He was super young. And there was a sense of inevitability around him for sure You know, he was very, he was super insecure because he was so young too, by the way. He was super young. And, you know, there was a sense of inevitability around him for sure because the site was growing so quickly. But at the same time, he didn't need to do that. He was a very smart young man and awkward, very, quite awkward actually. So Mark Zuckerberg didn't make this Donald Trump decision. Even though he's CEO bitch, he's off in the metaverse looking for legs.

It's not the first time he has tried to punt a major decision. After January 6, 2021, Facebook joined other platforms like Twitter and YouTube and booting Trump from their platform. Unlike the others, they tried to pass the buck to an oversight board that they had created. Why does Mark seem so resistant in owning this decision? It's a difficult decision, let's just be clear. You know, to kick a president, a sitting president off of a platform is a tough decision. And, you know, they had a really unusual relationship with their understanding of the First Amendment. I think he spends a lot of time talking to people, you know, the whole company has drifted

rightward over the years right now. A lot of counsel i was talking to somebody yesterday and they were like oh every lawyer over there is a you know a former trump person or very republican so they this idea it's sort of gone in combination with he feels persecuted presumably by the press and things like that and so it's where they all end up you know like elon musk and the others and so but he does have a basic sense that people should say what they want to say yeah uh he also has a basic sense that there should be community and the two are at cross purposes and so he's leaned toward let all hell break loose and we'll sort it out without understanding the power of of himself and the company and that was always an issue is acting like it was a little startup and and so he always has this sense, he and the people there, that they were just, you know, that they weren't powerful. But then they like to use the cloak of power when they would go to Davos or meet world leaders and this and that.

And Mark didn't really absolve power because here's a guy who, like, even though he's off in the metaverse and Nick Clegg is supposedly making this decision, he even, after the IPO, maintained this vice grip on the company. He has a dual-class voting structure. He owns about 90% of Class B shares. He can't be fired. Anyone who owns those shares cannot be fired. And so that's all you need to understand is that he makes every decision. And so the board is without any power. Which isn't that different to many others in the Valley, including Snap, Evan.

Snap, yeah, but it's a different situation when you have Facebook. It's a single person, and he has all power. He cannot be fired for life. He's there for life. Well, speaking of getting fired or not, you actually asked him this question about firing. This was after the Cambridge Analytica scandals. Right. Back then, you interviewed him.

He kind of put his neck out as being in charge while simultaneously saying Facebook isn't really responsible. Here's a clip and we've pared it back a bit. Should someone have been fired for this? You know, I'm just curious what you think. Well, I think it's a big issue. But look, I designed the platform. So if someone's going to get fired for this, it should be me. And I think that the important thing going forward is to make sure that we get this right.

But to be clear, you're not going to fire yourself right now? Is that right? Not on this podcast right now. That would be fantastic. I mean, I think you'll do okay. So let's get to the privacy and data part of it. One of the things you kept saying in Congress, which really drove me crazy because you said it like twice.

Do you really want me to fire myself right now? Sure. Just for the news? Yeah, why not? Oh, Cara. Well, I tried. I tried, people. I gave it my best.

Yeah, as you said. He got mad. He stuck on it. I was moving to something else and he noticed. Yeah, I noticed. He should not be. He got mad. He stuck on it. I was moving to something else, and he, you notice? Yeah, I noticed. He was irritated. That's why we played the clip long. Yeah, because he was irritated.

I hadn't heard that in a while, but I was moving on. And, you know, his sense of humor is, let me just be clear, Mark Zuckerberg is a very nice guy in a lot of ways compared to everybody else. But he really does get irked when you, if you're faster or wittier than him, which most people are. But he's, you know, he was stuck on that. That's interesting to hear that name. Yeah, we played it long for that reason. But he did that whenever you rubbed him in the interview, he would step back, he would kind of go, really, Kara, that's what you want? Just for the news, trying to diminish it, but actually bringing more attention

to it. Of course, I was always surprised by that he should just move on you know and have a sense of humor but he doesn't i didn't want to fire himself the question you were actually asking is should anyone be fired for this yeah who allowed this cambridge analytica scandal to occur like who allowed this data to be out in the ether and we're going to get to that question. But he moves from, so I should be the one that's fired for this in 2018. But I won't be. But I won't be. Comma. To, it's someone else's call in 2022.

That's right. So is this Mark evolving as a leader or devolving as a leader? It is still his call. I just, whatever, he can give it over to Nick Clegg, you know, glorified person that he puts in place or whoever. But, you know, Nick started off, well, you know, a glorified person that he puts in place or whoever, but, you know, Nick started off, well, you know, he's just, he's not, he doesn't have any skin in the game. Mark does. I mean, he does, I guess he sort of does. But it's easier to put it, you know, this very smooth talking British guy who's been in politics to just give it off to him. I find it fascinating that he wanted the responsibility,

but it is ultimately Mark's decision. I think he, I don't know what would have happened if he would have disagreed, but I never thought they were going to do anything but let him on the platform. Yeah. Importantly, the decision is not unlimited. Clegg talks about guardrails, so a crisis political protocol.

He also talks about it not being immediate. Nick Clegg says that engineers need some time to build out some of this guardrail functionality because they want to monitor what Trump does and that there is potential sanctions or resuspensions for further violations. It's going to be endless and terrible. What a terrible job for someone at Facebook to have to watch the babysit this guy, you know, this constant, persistent violator of rules. I think they've created a perfect machine where you can't, where nothing is a good decision. There's no good decisions here. And so they either have to decide, we're just going to do what we want and take the slings and arrows, or they're going to let

everybody talk. And that's, those are the two choices essentially. And then deal with those slings and arrows, you know, and the damage that could come with it. When I worked in Libya, Gaddafi used to do this thing called direct democracy, where everyone would vote on every single issue through these shabias or councils. And it was just a way to create chaos. The ultimate decision maker was obviously him. Right. A hundred percent. You know, I think he just doesn't want it. He thought he was starting this site and all of a sudden he's, you know's involved in world affairs. And I don't think for one, he's capable of it. Most people aren't, by the way. And two, he doesn't like it. It's like, ugh, all I get is shit. And that's right. Well, don't build such a shitty platform if you don't

want shit. I don't know what to say. It's weird. So let's do a quick lightning round on this. So one, explain why this is a big deal because even after Elon reinstates Trump's Twitter account, explain how this is different and the fundraising aspect of it. Well, Twitter, he just gets to like, he's the id. He just has to say stupid, racist, and sexist, whatever he's saying that day, something terrible, insulting some group of people and punching down to people. That's just noise. And I don't think it really affects anything. And it sort of gives him attention. It's sort of a carnival circus, essentially. In this case, he uses it for fundraising.

It's a super effective way to raise money and to get people on his side. And it's very effective that way. You can't do that on Twitter. It just doesn't. There's no mechanism. Since May of 2018, Trump and his affiliate group spent $159 million on Facebook and Instagram ads. And even though Facebook did make it harder with ads after 2016, it became less useful to politicians in 2020.

It's still incredibly useful. Do you think it's a good business decision for Facebook to reinstate Trump, especially since Mark has been trying to pull the company out of politics? The Wall Street Journal recently reported that in 2021, he actually tried to clear the news feed of politics a bit. Yeah, he did. Why would you want to be in this mess? It's no, there's no plus, it's not that good a business compared to other businesses. And meanwhile, as he's, you know, mired in this political stuff over at TikTok, they're dancing and having fun and doing ASMR. And so I don't think it's a very good business at all, especially in the direction he's going. He just, he's going to be in this

endless Groundhog Day cycle of Trump. He'll never, he can't quit him, you know, that kind of thing. Is it a good decision from a policy perspective? I mean, we talked about this before, kind of the inconsistency with leaders around the globe. I don't think there's any good decision. There's no good decision. Trump is so polarized and they helped create Trump's, you know, ability to be in office. So I am mixed. It's like, yeah, the Ayatollah says some terrible things. Why isn't he happy? But there are lines actually that Trump constantly goes over. And I do have a sense that my only thing about should he be able to say whatever he wants and people can hear him, he has plenty of other places, including, you know, the microphone.

It's definitely cut down. I think the issue is nobody wants to listen to him anymore. And that's what's going to happen here is like he seems to have lost a step everywhere and all the different mediums. I think the issue is nobody wants to listen to him anymore. I know. That's what's going to happen here. He seems to have lost a step everywhere in all the different mediums. So if he says something stupid on Twitter or Facebook, do we care anymore? If Trump falls in the forest, does anyone hear it? Especially, I mean, they have something in common because Facebook is a little irrelevant these days. I mean, Instagram, of course, is powerful.

WhatsApp is powerful. But if a tree falls in an empty forest, do you care? If a racist tweet falls in the forest, does anyone hear it? I don't, you know. Oh, it's a little quieter most days in this forest. Sort of. Will it have ripple effects? For example, do you think YouTube will reinstate Trump soon? You know, YouTube's been able to stay out of this in a lot of ways.

Susan Wojcicki's a rather clever CEO over there. You know, you don't ever, they have just as much stuff, including the Indian, the Modi stuff, right? Oh, the Modi stuff is, yeah. They're just trying to keep their head down and hope nobody notices. We're noticing, Susan. Yeah, we're noticing.

All right, now let's take a walk down memory lane. Tell me about the first time you met Mark Zuckerberg. Oh, this is my book. You're getting to talk about my book, but I- Scoop yourself. Scoop myself. I was aware of it in the early 2000s, like when it started and started to get popular at colleges.

And it was one of many. There was MySpace. There was a bunch of them. I can't even remember all their names, but there was a bunch. Some of them more popular than Facebook, but it was starting to gain traction on college campuses. So we started to pay attention to it.

There was a PR person named Brandy Barker who was very adamant that I come visit. And Owen Van Otta, who I'd known from Amazon before that. He was at Amazon. He was a bunch of places. And he said- Explain who Owen was. He was an executive. And he was very adamant that I come in and meet him. You should meet him. You would like this and that. And so I finally went into their, they had a headquarter in Palo Alto above Pizza My Heart. A lot of companies had been, it's a popular pizza place. I remember that place. On University Avenue. And so I went and met him and I walked into the office. And one of the things, I had talked to a bunch of venture capitalists and

he sounded like an asshole, like, oh, another asshole. And I think I said that. I'm like, oh, he sounds like another asshole. Like there's so many of them, so many arrogant young men. And I walked in, and the first thing he said to me was, I heard you think I'm an asshole. I wish I liked him for that. Like, he's sort of, you know, and I was like, so I said, yeah, and I said, well, I don't know you well enough to know if you're an asshole. I've heard you're an asshole or something like that. But we'll find out. Like, we'll to know if you're an asshole. I've heard you're an asshole or something like that. But we'll find out. Like, we'll find out if you're an asshole. He's not an asshole, actually.

He's not, as it turns out. He did asshole things, but he certainly isn't an asshole as a person. So anyway, so we walked. I think we walked around Palo Alto, and he was always super nervous around me. You kind of leaned into intimidating him because you've told me a story where you took his smoothie. Tell us. I don't want to go on about this story, but he used to have these green smoothies and I always asked for a sip and I'd always want to see if he would let me have one.

Did he? Yes, yes, always. He always let me have a sip. It was funny. What were you doing with that? I like green smoothies and I was doing it to, I guess, I was supposed to dominate him in some way. I just was curious. A power move. Yeah. You know, if I had asked that of Steve Jobs, he'd have thrown a smoothie in my face, like

that kind of thing. I would have never asked him. But I don't know why. I was just, they have really good smoothies at Facebook, let me just say, all the time. Much more subtle than an I'm a CEO bitch. Yes. Yeah, it was. It was interesting.

He would give them to me. I would often try to knock him off his thing by asking him, you know, direct questions. And I think what had started to happen by this time later, especially later when they moved into that big office building, was people, you know, even with Sundar Pichai or around the immigration stuff with Trump, I'd say, why aren't you saying something? And I don't think anyone had the audacity to say something to these people about things. And I tended to, like the firing thing, very typical. I'm like, you know, no one would have said that to him. And so that's why he was so, he didn't know what to think. No one talks to me like this. And I was like, oh, sorry. I don't work for you. Yeah.

And Facebook certainly started off small. I remember in this time, I mean, I was in college and Facebook was this thing that we were using. It was super, it seemed super safe. We were putting a lot of information on it and it was just college students, very gated. But then in 2005, they let on high school students. In 2006, they become an everyone app. Anyone with an email address can join. I think that's when I joined. In 2006, they become an Everyone app. Anyone with an email

address can join. I think that's when I joined. Because you old, Kara. Not old. I certainly wasn't in college. And then that same year, in 2006, they lowered the age to 13, and they announced News Feed, which got a lot of privacy pushback. I mean, not a lot compared to today, but a lot for then. And by 2009, they had the Like button. You were there covering all of this. How did you look at these incremental experiments with a small startup? It was always a privacy nightmare. There was a thing called Beacon where they would tell people what you bought. Like, it was so privacy problematic.

It was so... They were moving fast and breaking things, right? Yes. Well, that's a software term. But yes, I was always fascinated by that term because it's a software term but i was always thought why wasn't it move fast and fix things move fast and change things and they backed off you know beacon but they got in trouble for it they were always pushing the edge of privacy and much more so than others that was what was interesting is that others certainly google

was certainly a privacy you know sucking you, sucking all your privacy and information out. But they were explicit in doing it and making mistakes doing it. And so they would grab for any frigging piece of information they could get from people and you could see it. And they were sort of naked in their ambition to own all your privacy. And they would couch it in this term of, you know, we want to build a community. But there was a one-way street of information. It was we were giving you Facebook information, and they were using it, and they were making money off of it. It wasn't, AOL did the same thing, so did Google, but it was much more explicit, much more. Well, you and Walt Mossberg kind of glommed on to this privacy topic.

Glommed, yes, we glommed. You glommed on to it. We were concerned about privacy by this company because what did they do with it? Who were they? And when you saw the inside of these companies, it was chaotic. And so there was a very early word. There was people inside the company very early on looking at people's profiles. Same thing happened at Uber. But that was it. It was like, why do we trust these people with this enormous amount of personal information? Why do we? I don't. But privacy was a subject that you and your partner, Walt Mossberg, kind of got into when you interviewed Mark on stage in 2010. So this

was at the All Things D conference, and Mark is literally sweating. Was it hot in there? No. Were the lights on? Well, no. I thought he had a panic attack. He said he was sick. It was very uncomfortable because he started sweating profusely. Yeah. And you noticed because you were sitting closer to him than Walt was. I was right next to him. You were right next to him. And he's wearing this hoodie. So you ask him if he wants to remove it. He says he never removes the hoodie. And then Walt jumps back into another privacy question.

Let's play the clip. Before we move off this privacy thing, and I thought that was a fascinating answer. It's okay. You want to take off the hoodie? No, I never take off the hoodie. I know you don't. What's with that? There's a group of women in the audience that wish you would. No, no.

Girls? Whoa. All right. Sorry. No, no. Girls? Whoa. All right. Sorry. That's okay. Can you explain what this instant personalization thing was that you did and why you did it and what's the value of it to your users? Maybe I should take off the hoodie.

Take off the hoodie. Go ahead. What the hell? Go ahead. Here. You can get someone. You all right? Yeah.

This is a great moment in Internet history. What? You went on to see inside the hoodie was the Illuminati symbol. Yeah, it was a symbol. I have that hoodie. I have that hoodie. Yeah, because Brady, Barbara gave you a. Yes, one of them.

Yeah. It was really awkward. I think Walt could not see what was happening. The sweat was really dropping. And when I said the ladies in the audience, Sheryl Sandberg was in the front row losing her mind. I could see her, you know, right there. And she knew what was happening, and so did I.

It was super awkward because he was sweating so, so, so much. And I was worried he was going to faint, honestly. I thought he was going to faint. It's surprising because you and Walt have said that Cheryl told you he was ready for the privacy questions. He told me he was ready. We had talked about the movie, The Social Network, that night before at dinner. I think I had introduced him to Steve Jobs, or they'd sat and talked. And he had answered lots of questions about privacy. So it wasn't the questions. We were not in the hot seat and suddenly couldn't, oh, can you believe

it? He was, he was either ill or he, he had had panic attacks I had heard previously. And I think he was so nervous. He just started sweating and for whatever reason, and he, he would not take off the hoodie and it just, it became And it was uncomfortable for him and us. And one of the things I did there, especially making the joke about the hoodie, was trying to relieve his tension. Because there's no way I want someone like him to be uncomfortable on stage in that way. And he was in a state of distress. And I thought it wasn't good for us to keep pressing him when he was. And we wanted him to calm down.

And by the way, I have to say he did. He calmed down, and he had a great interview afterwards. And we gave him that moment instead of pressing on him. And he wrote us a lovely letter afterwards. What did it say? No, you know, he was, you know, sorry. It got so much attention. And he was just very cordial.

Because it looked like cleats lights, but it wasn't. It did. There wasn't. Nobody else had a problem. And so he wrote us a lovely letter saying, I'm really sorry. And thank you so much. Just he was always cordial. He never, but he never did an interview with us again.

I'll tell you that. That's the other thing is. Not the two of you together. Right. I mean, he did one with me. But he didn't, he wouldn't come to code again. And that was, he had been twice or two or three times at least. And so it was unfortunate. I don't think that was a, I know I get a lot of attention for that, but I don't feel great about that interview because I

feel bad when someone, anyone is in distress like that. And he was in physical distress. Yeah. And you don't, yeah, especially not when you're interviewing someone, you want someone to be comfortable so they can tell you, they can talk to you. Yeah. He was so embarrassed too. He was so embarrassed and he shouldn't have been at all, but he was. And I could see why. By the time you did that interview, Mark had a big company, you know, it wasn't this small startup. In 2008, he hired Sheryl Sandberg away from Google. I think you broke that story. I did break that story. Was hiring Sheryl, she was seen as an adult in the room.

Yeah, I hate that idea, but whatever. Was hiring Sheryl a turning point for Facebook? Did it show that he wanted to kind of open up decision-making and want adults in the room? Well, he wanted them to decide on things he wasn't interested in, which is the thing that made money, right? And that's the similar thing that happened at Google with Eric Schmidt. And Sheryl was an experienced ad executive, and that was critically important. At Google, she was running one of their big ad systems. And so she needed that.

The other thing is he had been through a series of COOs, including Wo and Van Otta and many others, that just didn't work. And they kept getting fired. It looked like chaos. And he was not capable of handling that part of it, especially the smoother part. Because he just wasn't, he's an awkward personality at the time. He's much better now. And so he brought her in. And they got along really well.

And she really did grow Facebook's ad business. She did. It was crazy what she did there. And they got along very well. They had almost, I would say, an older sister, younger brother kind of thing in a lot of weird ways. They became personally close, especially after Cheryl's husband, who was a very good friend of mine, died. Dave Goldberg. Dave Goldberg.

And so she was very good. They got along. And she took off his plate the stuff he hated and sort of was the smooth operator kind of personality. I wouldn't say an adult because I think that's the problem. I hate this idea of these people aren't adults. They're total adults. And so I hate that they're like, oh, the boys now have a mom like a Wendy and the lost boys. I can't stand that.

But I think they take advantage of that. Oh, they stole all your stuff? Oh, they're just boys. You know, that was irritating to me. Did she have sway with him? Because at the time, he also had these outside advisors. Peter Thiel was kind of the first money in, first big money in. Yeah, Mark Andreessen. Bill Gates was close to him. Microsoft put in a big stake in 2007. So did Cheryl have kind of

equal clout to him versus these advisors? Oh, for a long time. A hundred percent. Yeah. She was, I think, his principal advisor, I would say. You know, he always, you know, had these other people like Peter Mark Andreessen, Bill Gates, you know, who influenced him. Lots of people. Yeah. But I think she and he were a real unit for a very long time. They did a lot of stuff together.

He put her up. That was one of the things. He wasn't like a lot of men. He wasn't, he didn't have a problem putting a strong woman in charge kind of thing. Yeah, and putting her in front of people. Compare him to Elon, because you've talked about how Elon surrounded himself with people kind of looking him up and down. And Elon seems to be.

He didn't. He didn't. Did he allow other people to disagree with him at this time? It was different because he had people around him that agreed with him. That's all. And that was the problem. They all have this problem, as I say. But I think he didn't like dissent. He eventually didn't like dissent. No dictator does, Cara. But they all agreed with him. I remember Cheryl one time said to me, like, oh, we've all been together 10 years and we get

along so well. And I was like, is that a good thing? Like, I never think it's a good thing for companies not to have dissent internally. And so everybody's fortunes are linked to getting along and especially pleasing him. And even if he doesn't mean to do it, and I don't think he, unlike Elon, I think Elon needs attention almost constantly. You can see it even when he was walking out of a trial the other day, how'd I do? Like, oh my God, that is so pathetic. Like from the reporters hanging outside. Mark doesn't need that kind of,

you know, he's got a very loving family. He's got, you know, but you're around people who you're all in agreement. And so where's the push when things are problematic? No one's going to say, oh, the privacy thing, maybe we should do something about it. And I think if you're an adult, you want that. We'll be back in a minute. Fox Creative. This is advertiser content from Zelle.

When you picture an online scammer, what do you see? For the longest time, we have these images of somebody sitting crouched over their computer with a hoodie on, just kind of typing away in the middle of the night. And honestly, that's not what it is anymore. That's Ian Mitchell, a banker turned fraud fighter. These days, online scams look more like crime syndicates than individual con artists. And they're making bank. Last year, scammers made off with more than $10 billion. It's mind-blowing to see the kind of infrastructure that's been built to facilitate scamming at scale. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of scam centers all around the world. These are very savvy business people.

These are organized criminal rings. And so once we understand the magnitude of this problem, we can protect people better. we understand the magnitude of this problem, we can protect people better. One challenge that fraud fighters like Ian face is that scam victims sometimes feel too ashamed to discuss what happened to them. But Ian says one of our best defenses is simple. We need to talk to each other. We need to have those awkward conversations around what do you do if you have text messages you don't recognize? What do you do if you start getting asked to send information that's more sensitive? Even my own father fell victim to a, thank goodness, a smaller dollar scam, but he fell victim. And we have these conversations all the time.

So we are all at risk and we all need to work together to protect each other. Learn more about how to protect yourself at vox.com slash zelle. And when using digital payment platforms, remember to only send money to people you know and trust. Support for this show comes from Indeed. If you need to hire, you may need Indeed.

Indeed is a matching and hiring platform with over 350 million global monthly visitors, according to Indeed data, and a matching engine that helps you find quality candidates fast. Listeners of this show can get a $75 sponsored job credit to get your jobs more visibility at indeed.com slash podcast. Just go to indeed.com slash podcast right now and say you heard about Indeed on this podcast. Indeed.com In 2012, Facebook went public. You covered that for All Things D. And you're pretty complimentary about Mark then. You were predicting an overhyped valuation.

You noted he wasn't like blabby like Groupon or others were. And you talked about how he had been patient in growing his business. He did. About how he was insistent about conducting the IPO with deliberation and care. Were you hopeful or hopeless about Mark and Facebook then? I first thought that first valuation for Microsoft was insane. But you know, that was crazy. It was $15 billion for some reason. It sticks in my head. But those were crazy numbers at the time.

And they weren't. You know, now it's like a nothing burger. But once you could see him building it slowly, he was quite a good operator. And not every founder is a good operator. Bill Gates was the comparison I made with him. Nicer Bill Gates, essentially. Bill Gates was not a very nice person when he was CEO. He was just very careful. And he wasn't showy like the others.

And a million of them were more showy, and they didn't do as well as he did. And he picked Cheryl, and he picked... The executives were really competent. You could feel the competence off of them. And I thought he built a nice team. I just didn't think he built a team with enough people to push back on him. And then he started to shed those people, including me, including me.

Including you. We'll get to that. Shortly after the IPO, Facebook really swells. They passed a billion monthly active users in 2012. They go on a buying spree. They already had Instagram, but they eat up Oculus and WhatsApp. They try to buy Snap. And things seem to be going swimmingly for the most part until the 2016 elections.

We're going to get to Cambridge Analytica revelations, which come later. But first talk about 2016 itself, because right after the election, Facebook has called out for misinformation. And Mark kind of shrugged it off. He did. He said, I think the idea that fake news on Facebook influenced the election in any way is a pretty crazy idea. And then BuzzFeed just followed up, I think, less than a week later when they had their big investigative team showing that false news stories actually outperformed real news stories.

Yeah, it was in real time because when he said, he said nothing. He was on stage with David Kirkpatrick. I remember that. And I think I emailed or texted him and Cheryl and I said, nothing? Where are you coming up with that number? Don't say nothing if you don't know.

And I had a lot of discussions, especially with Cheryl about this because he kept walking it back. I'm like, if you don't know, stop talking, because I think you don't know. And again, it showed that they weren't managing the business. They were sloppy managers of the business. And also, it got sucked up into a media cycle, because I think some of it was overblown, no question, some of the reporting on Cambridge Analytica. But directionally, 100% correct. In the next two years, we kind of have a couple big revelations. In 2017, we learn about the foreign interference in the presidential election, right? The huge volume of Russian interference on Facebook and other platforms. And then in early

2018, there's this explosive expose on Cambridge Analytica. So we learned that this British consulting firm, this political consulting firm, bought personal data that had been harvested from tens of millions of Facebook users and used it to micro-target ads for Trump, as well as for campaigns like Brexit. How did you think Mark handled that? Because it had been built on a kind of bad stack. Well, he handled it like an engineer, right? Look, it wasn't as big as everybody said, but it was also not as little as he tried to make it, right? The roots were farther back when he allowed all kinds of developers, third-party developers on the platform. I always had an issue. He did it at one of his F-whatever, aid or whatever they called

them. He had these meetings with developers. And I used to think, some of these developers are kind of sketchy. Why are they getting all this information? And he cut that off at some point, but it was always a real problem. And he was never caring about it, right? And so you'd be like, well, who are you giving information to? How are you managing the information? And I think that's what was really at the heart of this. You know, he definitely tried to get off the developers, but the instinct was to give away information to make money. It was important for them to make the platform bigger, to have game players, whatever. Remember they had everybody on there? They had a big open, that was the whole thing, open graph in 2010. It's always like, wow, you've left all the doors open to this place with no keys.

Well, they tried to clean it up in 2014, but they didn't do it retroactively. Well, that was in their self-interest. Yes, but that was in their self-interest because they wanted to own it all. In March of 2018, he goes on a kind of apology tour for Cambridge Analytica, which is very different than the listening tour he went to in 2017 where people thought he was going to run for president. That was funny. Yeah. But you got an interview with him late, but you got it. Yeah, I did. It's only 20 minutes. It's on the phone on the way to him going to employee Q&A. That's correct. And we don't have the audio, but the transcript really struck me because you start the interview abruptly and you say,

As you know from us emailing, I'm very interested in tough, substantive discussions and questions about this. So that's why I've been so adamant. Let's just get started. I'm interpreting how you'd read it. Adamant. It was a word for pissed. Because what they did is they went around real reporters and gave them to much easier reporters. I don't know how else to read it. Adamant. It was a word for pissed. Because what they did is they went around real reporters and gave them to much easier reporters.

I don't know how else to say it. But they did that a lot. They started to do this a lot. They didn't want to answer tough questions. And so they gave all these kiss-ass interviews. And I was furious because we were really doing a good job covering it. I thought we were very responsible on the Cambridge Analytical stuff. I don't think we went off, you know,

we didn't accuse them of being Satan or things like that. And so I called, I think it was Rachel Whetstone. I was like, what the fuck? What the living fuck are you doing? You're not giving us an interview. And we were at one of the leading news sources. And so I was pissed. And so I emailed him. I'm like, we want to do substantive thing and you want to do light and this is important. And so I kind of bullied him into doing it. But he should have. It was a good interview, by the way. It was the best interview of all those interviews, too, because I pushed him. In just 20 minutes with you and Kurt Wagner. And he kind of gave you the same, we're a small company and I'm just too idealistic defense that we kind of get. You were not buying the Kool-Aid. No, I was not. A couple months later, after Mark

goes for those awkward congressional testimonies in which he's either kind of grilled by the Senate or bear hugged by geriatric members of the House whose grandkids love Facebook, you sit with him for over an hour. This is July of 2018. I'm surprised he came back. How did you negotiate that interview? Again, it was Rachel Whetstone, who's now at Netflix, who probably regrets that one. You know, I think she was smart. She wanted to get him out there. I think she had a lot of regard for him. And Mark is a lot smart. You know, he has trouble with me and some reporters. And so she wanted to show that he could. And I think he did. And we did this interview out at

Facebook headquarters, and it did not go well for him. Did not go well for him. We'll get to the part that really didn't go well. But first you asked him about Cambridge Analytica, Russian interference, and he said something that stood out to me. Let's play a clip. In retrospect, I do think it's fair to say that we were overly idealistic and focused on more of the good parts of what connecting people and giving people a voice can bring.

And I think now we understand that given where we are, both the centrality of Facebook, but also frankly, we're a profitable enough company to have 20,000 people go work on reviewing content. So I think that that means that we have a responsibility to go do that. So idealistic. I was too idealistic.

We've made a toxic waste dump. Maybe we should clean it up. And he had a lot of money at this point. Of course he did. He should have done it from the beginning. This is something I've been in a constant fight with Facebook about, whether it was Facebook Live. Like, why don't you put tools in from the beginning, safety tools? Safety was never their first interest ever.

It's not idealistic. That's what drove me crazy. Yeah, that's just a cloak, right? I think so. I think it was just ridiculous. It happened too many times from way back in beacon days. It happened so much that at some point, like, are you stupid or are you doing this on purpose? So that's the thing. You keep pushing him on, like, how did you not foresee? Like, you build things. Consequences with my themes. Yes. And yet he kind of kept saying. What, me? We were just too idealistic. We're just a small company, right? Meanwhile, he's been meeting with world leaders for years now. He's

a very famous rich person. People a year before thought he was going to run for president. That's right. When he went on his weird tour. Yeah. Yeah, his weird tour. He was shooting Buffalo, if you remember. He was driving around in a car with Mayor Pete. Yeah. South Bend, Indiana. The Buffalo. I'll never forget that he gave to Cheryl. The Buffalo. And he went to see these families who were like, I'd vote for Mark. Yeah. It was the adventure of Mark Zuckerberg.

But the 2018 interview did not go well for him. And let's talk about why it didn't go well. The one comment he made that got to headlines. this is, you're asking him about Sandy Hook. I'm trying to talk about Alex Jones, right. And he brings up something completely unexpected. Agreed. Let's play a clip. Sandy Hook didn't happen is not a debate.

It is false. You can't just take that down. I agree that it is false. Okay. And I also think that going to someone who is a victim of Sandy Hook and telling them, hey, no, you're a liar, that is harassment and we actually will take that down. But overall, you know, I mean, let's take this a little closer to home, right? So I'm Jewish and there's a set of people who deny that the Holocaust happened. I find that deeply offensive.

But at the end of the day, I don't believe that our platform should take that down because I think that there are things that different people get wrong. I don't think that they're intentionally getting it wrong. In the case of the Holocaust deniers, they might be. It's hard to impugn intent and to understand the intent. But I just think for as abhorrent as some of those examples are, I think the reality is also that I get things wrong

when I speak publicly. I'm sure you do. I'm sure a lot of leaders and public figures we respect do too. And I just don't think that it is the right thing to say we are going to take someone off the platform if they get things wrong, even multiple times. Oh, gosh. Oof. Was that bad? It is bad now. Yeah, it's bad now. I listen to it. I'm like, oh, good God, Mark. After the interview, he clarified the comments. He said he finds Holocaust denial deeply offensive and, quote, he didn't intend to defend the intent of

people who deny that. I think he said both those things. But what were you thinking as he said that? Well, it was an interesting moment as a reporter because I usually was like, what the fuck? My answer would have, I said, but go ahead. Do you see how I said that? Because I couldn't believe he was going to Holocaust. That's your favorite thing to say, by the way, but go ahead. But go ahead. In that case, I was, I couldn't believe he said it. I couldn't believe, first of all, I couldn't believe he was going to the Holocaust because I thought, oh, no, no, no. And don't do the, I'm Jewish because, and I, so therefore, that was, he was trying to say, me of all people should be more, I think we all should be offended by the Holocaust, but fine, great, okay. But then

he sort of was like essentially saying, well, I don't think they intentionally get it wrong. And that was like, what? So here he is letting these people game him over and over and over again and pretending they just are getting it wrong. They're not getting it wrong. They're purposely and viciously and they're stone cold anti-Semites and they have no business on this platform. They're trying to sow harm. Yes, exactly. Just so they could say their piece. Well, we know they hate Jewish people.

Thank you. That's been very clear for many centuries. I just was sort of like, and I looked at Eric. Eric Johnson, your former producer, right? Yes, Eric Johnson. And I looked at him and he looked at me and for some reason they didn't understand

what he had just said. And we were like, let's get it up before they figure out what they just said. And I looked at him and he looked at me and for some reason they didn't understand what he had just said. And we were like, let's get it up before they figure out what they just said. Because I couldn't believe he said it, but it was such an insight that he really, he actually believed it. I was so, I wasn't shocked, but I was like, oh no, here's the person running this site. And they really think people just get it wrong and not that they're bad players or anything else. It was a real moment. That was a real moment in an interview. So that's why I was quiet.

Because I wanted you to understand his point of view. And there was nowhere for him to hide because I wasn't haranguing him. I wasn't peppering him. I just let him say it. And it was so clear what he said. And I'll have to clarify it. He didn't need to clarify it. That's what he thought. And I wanted people to see it just the way it was. And he didn't break a sweat. Didn't break a sweat. He said what he meant. Yeah. It took two years for

Facebook to ban Holocaust denial posts after that conversation, more than two years, like until October 2020. Alex Stamos, who was the former chief security officer at Facebook, told you in an interview on our old show that the attention from your conversation with Mark probably delayed him in reversing the decision, that he dug in his heels. Do you think that's true? And what does that say about Mark? He doesn't want to be, he doesn't have other people telling him he's wrong. He doesn't have the foresight to say, oh, my God, what did I do? Again, he doesn't think he's powerful.

It's powerful people who pretend they're not powerful, like super powerful people with implications of what they do. And somehow it was my fault, what he thought. I'm sure that's what happened. And then of course, he changed his mind two years later, all the damage that it did. And he came to the same place that I told him he was going to be at. I felt like his parent at that point, like, what the hell are you thinking? That means that Sheryl Sandberg was your oldest child. point. Like, what the hell are you thinking? That means that Sheryl Sandberg was your oldest child. No, she wasn't. If we're going to continue the analogy. How did that interview change your relationship with Mark, with the company? Because, you know, we've been working together, you and I, for three years now, I think, almost. And we ain't getting any Mark Zuckerberg interviews.

We're not getting any Mark Zuckerberg. Never again. Or any other executives. I mean, I think they maybe maybe Nick one day will come. He's used to the British press. But I don't know. How did the interview change that relationship? Never getting an interview again. Never, never anywhere. It was my fault that he said what he thought. You know what I mean? Like I somehow use my magical powers of interview to get it out of him. I didn't. He told the truth, and that was a problem. That was a problem for them. And so, you know, I then got very, very angry about what was happening

because they just wouldn't listen. I started to be much more critical around Trump. I had already been critical about when they went and sucked up Trump after he won. And they thought I was hostile to the company when in fact, if you look back at my stuff, it's not hostile. I'm just like, this is going to end badly, may I just say.

And I even, I did predict what Trump was going to do around January 6th. I said, he's going to lie about the election. And they just, I remember writing a comment. I got, how dare you say this? I was like, oh, all right, fine. What is Mark's Achilles heel as an interviewee? Normally, I don't want to tip off potential guests to their vulnerabilities.

No, I'm never going to interview him again. We have so little chance. Tell all, Kara. What does he do? I think now, I think he still is the same kid I met back then. That's the thing, is he's not any smarter. He's gotten more training, but it very easy to um go past his talking point he's not very good at talking points um and i think he wants to you know it sounds like dumb

you remember that scene in a few good men yeah i think he wants to say it like at the last thing like yeah he wants to say he did the code red right and that's what it is he really wants to say it and so so it's hubris uh no I think he's like, I have something to say. He's gotten a lot of shit. Let me just say, he's gotten probably more shit than any executive. And he's become the villain in a way that he doesn't deserve in many ways. But he's got, I think he really, I honestly think he wants to say it. And so I provide a situation where he gets to say it.

And sometimes he wants, in Mark's case, I don't think that's the case, some of these people try to see if they can beat me, which is ridiculous. I mean, I won already if that's what they're doing. And so I don't think that's it. It's just he's constitutionally unable not to say what he thinks.

And so that's what happens in interviews with me. And he gets nervous. And so that's another thing. And he doesn't, now he's a titan of industry. He doesn't want to look like he's weak in any way. We'll be back in a minute. Thumbtack presents the ins and outs of caring for your home. Out. Uncertainty. Self-doubt. Stressing about not knowing where to start.

In. Plans and guides that make it easy to get home projects done. Out. Word art. Sorry, Live Laugh Lovers. In. Knowing what to do, when to do it, and who to hire. Start caring for your home with confidence. Download Thumbtack today.

Support for this podcast comes from Aura. Finding the perfect gift can feel impossible this time of year, especially when you're shopping for the people you love the most. It should be something they'll actually use, but practicality alone isn't going to cut it. You want something a little more meaningful than a great can opener or a cozy pair of socks. That's where Aura comes in. Wirecutter named Aura the number one digital picture frame, and it's not hard to see why. Aura's frames make it incredibly easy to share unlimited photos and videos directly from your phone to the frame. And when you give an Aura frame as a gift,

you can personalize and preload it with a thoughtful message and photos using the Aura app, making it an ideal present for long-distance loved ones. For a limited time, you can visit auraframes.com and get $45 off Aura's best-selling Carver matte frames by using promo code VOX at checkout. That's A-U-R-A frames dot com, promo code VOX. This exclusive Black Friday Cyber Monday deal is their best of the year, so don't miss out. Terms and conditions apply. The other day you talked to me about a time where Mark used to listen. You said that was back when Mark used to listen. Yeah. What did you mean by that? Oh, he'd call me up at night. You know, he would write these long, long essays about community. He did one that was like 26 pages long.

And I think the first thing he was, and he wanted to know what I thought, which was interesting. And he. So he's inviting critique and so on. Oh, yeah. No, he wanted to engage. He found other people to engage with that weren't quite so critical. And the first thing I said is, I really think you need an editor. You know, this is just ridiculous.

It was so long and not badly written. It just needed an editor. This is just ridiculous. It was so long and not badly written. It just needed an editor. It wasn't clear. And he's like, oh, everyone else likes it. I'm like, yeah, of course they do, Mark. But it's too long and it's not clear. And he also had a lot of stuff about this community and these lofty ideas that were just not true. And so we talked a lot. We talked a lot about that idea. And we talked about a lot of things for a long time. And I just think he just didn't. I probably was too critical for him. And I thought that helped him. But I didn't want to be his friend. I'm not his friend. And he asked me what I thought. And I told him, I think you have a way too powerful platform here.

And I think you need to understand your responsibility to it and the people that you serve. Mark gave a commencement speech back in his heyday of 2017 at Harvard, that peak year when he was going on that political tour with the cattle. When he was meeting all the cows. All the cows, yeah. And here's what he said in the commencement speech. Be prepared to be misunderstood. Anyone working on a big vision is going to get called crazy, even if you end up right. Anyone taking on a complex problem is going to get blamed for not

fully understanding it, even though it's impossible to know everything up front. Anyone taking initiative will always get criticized for moving too fast, because there's always someone who wants to slow you down. In our society, we often don't take on big things because we're so afraid of making mistakes that we ignore all the things wrong today if we do nothing. The reality is, anything we do today is going to have some issues in the future.

But that can't stop us from getting started. Oh, there's so much wrong in that statement. I can't even tell you. You know, everyone's wrong but me. I'm an aggrieved citizen. It is so, that is absolutely the distillation of the attitude of people in Silicon Valley is we were, you know, if you get in our way, girls or, you know, mean ladies like Kara. Anyone that disagrees. You don't understand. Anyone that disagrees. And by the way, let me just tell you, guess who disagreed with Mark? People who he bought companies from,

and who do not like him, I would say. Who left him. Brian Acton from WhatsApp. WhatsApp, Instagram, Systrom, and Mike Krieger. You know, I just am like, is everybody wrong? Is everybody who says just a second wrong? Roger McNamee was another one. His big advisor. Yes. And Chris Hughes spoke out about him. Yes, exactly.

And so it's like I'm listening to Peter Thiel and Mark, I mean, an unholy alliance of Peter Thiel and Mark Andreessen. And it's really disappointing. They made him. Because, by the way, Mark's a better person than either of those two every day of the week and twice on Sunday. That's the problem. A better person, a better citizen of the United States and the world. And it's sad that this is the influence. This is what happens to someone like him because he's actually, again, a good guy. I'm going to say it over and over again. Do you think he's misunderstood? No. Or do you think he misunderstands? I think he's totally understood. I think he's totally understood.

I think he's totally understood. And he just doesn't like it. And that's the issue. When you joined The Times in 2018, you wrote a lot about him before, but you were an opinion writer. It's why I joined The Times. And you wrote a lot about him. I'm going to ask you to read some of these headlines. So let me just say the very first one was the most critical one, which was the expensive education of Mark Zuckerberg.

That was the most direct I was trying to do. That's why- Fall 2018. If I had stopped doing Times columns for that, it would have been good because that's what I wanted to say, that they had amplified and weaponized information and this guy is at the center of it.

And the expensive education was not that it cost him a lot, it cost us a lot. It cost us a lot. Society a lot. Same thing with the Holocaust. That's what I was talking about. So I later wrote, A Wise Man Leaves Facebook about Kevin Systrom. Lean out, Mark Zuckerberg. Let me fix that op-ed you wrote, which was a ridiculous piece about the First Amendment,

I think. I wrote about Facebook's biblically bad week. I wrote, clean up your act, Facebook, or we're leaving. I wrote, Zuckerberg never fails to disappoint. I wrote the terrible cost of Mark Zuckerberg's naivete. And I wrote the endless Facebook apology. It kind of comes full circle. That's just, by the way, a small sampling, Kara. Just some of my favorites. So the hits. Lean Out is probably my favorite. That's just, by the way, a small sampling, Kara. Just some of my favorites. So the hits. Lean Out is probably my favorite. That was kind of about how Cheryl got thrown under the bus. Yeah, yeah. She has plenty of responsibility. Let me just say, people always say I'm too nice to her.

She has plenty of responsibility, but nonetheless, guess who can't be fired? Yeah, the CEO bitch. That one. That's right. That guy. That guy. So you've been critical, but what has Mark done well in all this time i think it's a i think it's well built the service is well built i think the idea of it is great i think he handles layoffs beautifully like recently he showed a lot of class um i think in part he's right about apple's power but the way he does it i don't agree with he shouldn't put himself in that situation to start with um i think he means well. You're not going to see him tweeting all sorts of nonsense that Elon does, and Jeff Bezos sometimes too, right? Every now and then you're like, oh,

shut up. Stop talking. You don't see that. I think he actually does care for the product. He's a real product guy. And I don't know if he's the most creative person in the world. When you look at the metaverse stuff, you're like, oh, no, no, no, no, no, sir. He doesn't mind being wrong, but he never says he's wrong, right? That's the thing. He won't shift. He's slow to shift. Yes, he's slow to shift. I don't think he'll ever say it, but I think he does see threats. I like that about him. He's competitive about TikTok, whoever's coming. It tends to make him want to copy things. I used that about him. He's competitive about TikTok, whoever's coming. It tends to make him want to copy things. I used to call them shoplifters at Facebook.

So that I don't love. But, you know, there's a lot of non-creative. Bill Gates was not very creative. The question was what you thought he did well, Cara. But you answered that. Yeah, a lot of things. A lot of things. Someone once described, someone who knows Peter Thiel well,

described Peter Thiel to be as being driven by two principles, one, loyalty, and two, contrarianism. What do you think Mark Zuckerberg's guiding principles are, if you had to analyze from your reporting? I think he doesn't mind there being collateral damage to the things he does. Think of Augustus Caesar, you know, like, well, we got democracy, a lot of people died, like that kind of thing. Oh, yeah. So big picture oriented. Big picture oriented. I think big picture, he's right. Small picture, some of the executions been bad. And he tries things, you know, he tried the phone. Yeah, the smartphone that came in wet. It's called home. HTC. He did Libra, the cryptocurrency. Yeah. So you've seen him experience a lot of failure in those products. And how does Mark deal with that failure from your observation? He moves on. I just don't think they're very creative at Facebook.

That's all. They got the news feed right. And that was a while ago. And but when you look at a lot of their innovations, they're copied from other people. And so, you know, but he moves on. That's great. He's trying things. The metaverse is the first time he's really gone out on a limb by himself on a thing that they're in the front of.

What do you think's driving that? Is this like a displacement activity for him where he just wants to get out of this kind of fucked up business? Yeah, I think he wants to get out of the face. That's why he's not making this decision. Why did he change the name? Yeah. He put on a mustache. It's a new mustache. It's still Mark. That all came after the whistleblower revelations in fall of 2021, where Frances Haugen released a treasure trove of documents to the journal, etc. And she came and talked to us about it on the last show. She didn't work directly with Mark, but she observed him in the company. And she describes the obsession with flatness at Facebook.

Here she is describing the offices. It's basically an aircraft hangar. But they do that because no one is above anyone else. No one is below. It's flat. And when you refuse to acknowledge the power exists, you actually end up reinforcing the fact that power isn't flat in the world. And so I think it's one of these things where they haven't been able to hit that point of maturation where they say, actually, no, like we have a lot of responsibility here. Yeah, she's right. That's what I've been saying. What do you think it will take for Mark to acknowledge his own power? He won't. Everybody's, you know, everyone's the same. And I'm like, and then they get on

the private plane and fly off, right? And they get to make the decisions it's sort of so they own 90 of the class exactly it's just I don't think they will I don't think they will who do you think he would uh who do you think he likes less you or Francis Hogan I don't know or who do you think irks him more well I think he I think he was irked by the coverage of it and probably got too much coverage, probably. I like Francis. But, you know, I think, I don't think he dislikes me in his heart. I don't think he's, he's not like that. He's not like that. He's not. He just doesn't want to step in it again.

Yeah. He probably thinks I'm just, I'm just hostile. I think that's the worst thing he would say about me, probably. Maybe not. Maybe he's telling people, that bitch. I'm CEO bitch. That's the bitch bitch. That people, that bitch. I'm CEO bitch. That's the bitch bitch. That's the real bitch.

That fucking bitch. Okay. But I've been right. So I'm your best friend, Mark. That's what I say to Mark. I'm your best fucking friend. That's what I say to you when I disagree with you. I'm your best friend.

I'm your best friend. What would redemption look like for Mark Zuckerberg? I assume it's not in the metaverse. I don't know. This metaverse thing, boy, is he going for it with the money? And it's not good. It's not going to end well. Can he redeem himself? Yeah. Bill Gates. Look at Bill Gates. He's the villain, Darth Vader of that era. Except this Epstein situation, which is, of course, a problem. Mark, avoid an Epstein-like situation. You'll be fine. He's very happily married and seems very loyal to his wife priscilla

yeah he is he is a hundred percent um and his wife is lovely i understand he's a terrific father um so yes he can give away money and do stuff and we will forget we will buy guns and by the way people will do worse to let elon's already sort, oh, let's get Mark back because he's at least we could, he's not a jackass like Elon Musk. So yeah, so yeah, yeah, yeah, he can redeem himself. Oh, how things have changed in the last couple of years where you're like, Mark Zuckerberg is great compared to Elon. That was not the case two years ago for you. He is, but he is. Mostly because he's lost power and the company's not as relevant and he's got competition

and he's also not a jerk. And Bill Gates is a good model for him. In 2018, you asked him who he looked up to, his mentors are, and his first person was Bill Gates. And Bill Gates was similarly obtuse to the challenges that Microsoft posed to the world. 100%.

And yet after antitrust was able to hand over the reins a little bit. Yeah, he did. And I think he's happier. So do you think that's what it will take for Mark handing over the reins? Yeah, I think he wants to. I have this feeling he's like, I'm trapped here. You know what I mean? Maybe he's super interested in metaverse.

I don't know how you could be, but it's just not. You play a lot of video games. You might be interested in metaverse, by the way. I just don't. It's not where we're going. We're going lots of other places, but not there just not. You play a lot of video games. You might be interested in that. I guess. I just don't. It's not where we're going. We're going lots of other places, but not there right now. I think he probably wants to get out. It must be such a prison.

It sounds crazy, but I feel like where does he, he can't go anywhere. He's so famous. So much security. Like one of the things that he, that I think is unfair and I never do is remember when he was doing his, his weird kiteboarding. I think is unfair and I never do is, remember when he was doing his weird kiteboarding?

I think that's nice that he does stuff. I think nice that he does his punching stuff. He does all kinds of taekwondo, whatever. Yeah, he talked to Joe Rogan about his MMA obsessions. Whatever. I think that's great. But when people make fun of his looks, it drives me crazy. You know, his haircut or when he was wearing um the correct kind of sunscreen i think that was really irritating i don't think that's fair yeah i find that i think that's not nice it's not nice

last question yeah what would be your first question in an interview with mark zuckerberg that's a good question um what's new i'd start in the metaverse. I'd start talking about the future. I don't want to relitigate all the stuff that I was 100% right about, but I would start to talk about what his vision is now and why he's still doing it. Why are you doing this?

I don't understand personally why you're doing this. So I'd like you to explain to me why you're doing it. I hope you get to ask that question. I will not. We will try adamantly. Never.

Be adamant. Never unless we're caught in an elevator together by accident and it breaks down. You know. A broken elevator. Us producers could arrange that. No. Not with a security team. All right.

Miss you, Mark. Big hug. You think he'll listen? I don't know. Probably not. Someone you, Mark. Big hug. You think he'll listen? I don't know. Probably not. Someone will. Someone over at Bend That Park will. Andy Stone.

Hey, Andy. Hi, Andy. Make it so. Don't you have any juice, Andy? Nick, don't you people have juice? I guess not. Turns out you don't. I'm on the show.

All right. Thanks, Carrie. Do you want to read us out or shall I? I shall do it. Today's show was produced by Naeem Araza, Blake Neshek, Christian Castro-Rossell, and Raffaella Seward. Special thanks to Hayley Milliken.

Our engineers are Rick Kwan and Fernando Arruda. Our theme music is by Trackademics. If you're already following the show, you get a stop on the Mark Zuckerberg Listening Tour. If not, you get a stop on the Mark Zuckerberg listening tour. If not, you get a stop on the Mark Zuckerberg listening tour. Go wherever you listen to podcasts, search for On with Kara Swisher and hit follow. Thanks for listening to On with Kara Swisher from New York Magazine, the Vox Media Podcast Network and us.

We'll be back on Thursday with more.