Tangle - Mark Zuckerberg’s Letter to Congress

Starting point is 00:00:00 Whether renting, renewing a mortgage, or considering buying a home, everybody has housing costs on their minds. For free tools and resources to help you manage your home finances, visit Canada.ca slash it pays to know. A message from the Government of Canada. From Searchlight Pictures comes A Real Pain, one of the most moving and funny films of the year. Written and directed by Oscar-nominated Jesse Eisenberg

Starting point is 00:00:23 and starring Eisenberg and Emmy Award winner Kieran Culkin, A Real Pain is a comedy about mismatched cousins who reunite for a tour through Poland to honor their beloved grandmother. The adventure takes a turn when the pair's old tensions resurface against the backdrop of their family history. A Real Pain was one of the buzziest titles at Sundance Film Festival this year, garnering rave reviews and acclaim from both critics and audiences alike. See A Real Pain only in theaters November 15th. Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+.

Starting point is 00:01:12 From executive producer Isaac Saul, this is Tangle. Good morning, good afternoon, and good evening, and welcome to the Tangle podcast, the place we get views from across the political spectrum, some independent thinking, and a little bit of my take. I'm your host, Isaac Saul, and on today's episode, we are going to be talking about Mark Zuckerberg's letter to Congress, in which he talks about some of the pressures he felt as the head of Facebook from the government, the Biden administration, and also the FBI under the Trump administration. Before we jump in, though, and pass it off to John for the main podcast, I want to give you a heads up that tomorrow

Starting point is 00:02:07 we're going to be doing a members-only reader mailbag in our newsletter. If you're not subscribed to our newsletter, you can do that by going to readtangle.com. And if you want to get tomorrow's members-only newsletter, you have to become a member, which means going to readtangle.com forward slash membership and subscribing. Yes, to answer many of your questions, as always, we are working on the

Starting point is 00:02:31 ad-free podcast. They are coming, I promise you. We had a big team retreat this weekend. We're talking about how to strategize around them. Unfortunately, I think there's going to be a reality where I don't know that we're going to be able to pair those subscriptions with the subscriptions to the newsletter, which is something we really wanted to do. So it might have to be a separate Tangle podcast subscription, which might be annoying for those of you who subscribe to the newsletter and to the podcast. But yeah, we've been spending weeks on trying to solve this tech problem of integrating those subscriptions and we are basically giving up because it seems like it's impossible. So we're going to get you the ad-free podcast. It's not exactly how we wanted to do it, but I know a lot

Starting point is 00:03:16 of you want them and they are coming. We are hearing you. We are getting your emails. We are working on it. All right. With that out of the way, I'm going to send it to John for today's main story, and I'll be back for my take. Thank you, Isaac, and welcome, everybody. Here are your quick hits for today. First up, Ukrainian forces struck two oil depots inside Russia overnight while Russia launched its third major aerial attack on Ukraine in the past week.

Starting point is 00:03:48 Number two, Israel launched airstrikes and raids in multiple cities in the West Bank yesterday, killing at least 10 Hamas militants, according to Hamas and Israeli officials. The operation is one of the largest in the West Bank in 20 years. Number three, an FBI report found that the shooter who attempted to assassinate Donald Trump

Starting point is 00:04:04 had done research on the campaign schedules of Trump and President Joe Biden and viewed Trump's Pennsylvania rally as an opportunity. Law enforcement has still not identified a motive. Number four, the Supreme Court maintained its pause on President Biden's $4 billion student loan forgiveness plan while a lower court considers the case. plan, while a lower court considers the case. And number five, French authorities released Telegram CEO Pavel Durov from police custody, but charged him with a series of crimes, including complicity in distributing child pornography, illegal drugs, and hacking software on the messaging app. Well, the CEO of the social media giant Meta revealing that his company censored some of its content around the COVID-19 pandemic. Mark Zuckerberg says his teams didn't want to, but they were under serious pressure from the Biden administration. And he is telling members of Congress that this will not happen again.

Starting point is 00:05:07 For years, critics have taken aim at Facebook for silencing views that challenge the general consensus in the medical community, especially about the origin of COVID-19. Now Facebook's founder surprisingly says they're right. On Monday, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg sent a letter to the Republican-led House Judiciary Committee claiming that the Biden administration had pressured the company to censor content related to COVID-19 in 2021.

Starting point is 00:05:33 Zuckerberg also said that Meta should not have temporarily suppressed a 2020 New York Post story about the contents of Hunter Biden's laptop while it waited for fact-checkers to verify the article's details. The House Judiciary Committee, led by Representative Jim Jordan, the Republican from Ohio, claimed that Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram and other social media platforms, have censored conservative speech online. In July 2023, Jordan threatened to hold Zuckerberg in contempt of Congress for refusing to cooperate with the probe into social media censorship. Zuckerberg and other social media executives have been subject to heightened congressional scrutiny in the past year. The issues referenced in Zuckerberg's letter stem from a push against

Starting point is 00:06:14 misinformation about COVID during the first year of President Biden's term. That year, Surgeon General Vivek Murthy released a Surgeon General's advisory that highlighted the urgent threat of false information about the pandemic, while Biden said misinformation about COVID vaccines was killing people, a statement he later walked back. In 2022, a group of Republican attorneys general sued the Biden administration over an alleged pressure campaign on social media companies to suppress posts that it thought would contribute to vaccine hesitancy. The Supreme Court eventually sided with the Biden administration, but congressional Republicans have continued to investigate related claims. Separately, in October 2020, when the New York Post published the story

Starting point is 00:06:54 detailing the contents of a laptop that belonged to Hunter Biden, Joe Biden's son, containing salacious photographs and email exchanges between Hunter and an executive at the Ukrainian energy company Burisma. Soon after the piece was released, Twitter blocked it from being shared on Facebook and throttled the story over the FBI's claims that the material was Russian disinformation. The emails were later authenticated, and then Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey apologized for blocking the story. Zuckerberg's letter is his own mea culpa for Facebook's handling of both pandemic-related content and the Hunter Biden laptop story. The Biden administration, including the White House, repeatedly pressured our teams for months to censor certain COVID-19 content, including humor and satire, Zuckerberg wrote, adding, I believe the government pressure was

Starting point is 00:07:39 wrong and I regret we were not more outspoken about it. Zuckerberg also said the decision to throttle the Hunter Biden story was prompted by an advanced FBI warning about a potential Russian disinformation campaign in the lead-up to the 2020 election, but wrote, In retrospect, we shouldn't have demoted the story. We've changed our policies and processes

Starting point is 00:07:58 to make sure this doesn't happen again. Finally, Zuckerberg noted that he will no longer fund local election jurisdictions to help the team administer elections, writing that while previous donations were intended to be nonpartisan and spread across the urban, rural, and suburban communities, they created a perception that this work benefited one party over the other. After the release of the letter, House Republicans called it a big win for free speech, adding that it validated their longstanding assertions about censorship on Facebook. Today, we'll explore arguments from the left and the right about Zuckerberg's letter and the debate over censorship online, and then Isaac's take.

Starting point is 00:08:48 We'll be right back after this quick break. Are you sure you parked over here? Do you see it anywhere? I think it's back this way. Come on. Hey, you're going the wrong way. Feeling distracted? You're not alone.

Starting point is 00:09:05 Whether renting, considering buying a home, or renewing a mortgage, many Canadians are finding it hard to focus with housing costs on their minds. For free tools and resources to help you manage your home finances and clear your head, visit Canada.ca slash ItPaysToKnow. A message from the Government of Canada. Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web,

Starting point is 00:09:37 his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. All right, first up, let's start with what the left is saying. The left criticizes the letter arguing that Zuckerberg is complaining about acceptable government behavior. Some say Zuckerberg is pandering to Republicans. Others suggest the letter is a strategic move to take attention off of meta. In Newsweek, Jason Fields said, Zuckerberg's problem isn't free speech.

Starting point is 00:10:10 It's lies. Social media has always been about promoting ourselves and our ideas to friends, family, and, if you get lucky or the algorithmic gods grab you, the wider world. What it has not been about is supplying the world with accurate information, Fields wrote. At its most malevolent, some individual or group posts information that's false and can harm others, or even kill them, like maybe telling people not to get a vaccine to protect themselves against a deadly disease, for fun. A government agency responsible for the public's health and welfare should certainly have the same freedom to report something as a crabby individual who thinks that your new swimsuit is too revealing. So let's see if we've got this all

Starting point is 00:10:49 straight. The head of one of the largest tech companies has sent a letter to Congress complaining about how his company behaved during the COVID epidemic when asked by the government to get the story straight, Fields said. Whichever party is in control of the levers of government, the government gets to ask, not tell. Facebook gets to say yes or no. Everything else is purely an internal issue for Mark Zuckerberg and Silicon Valley's people of conscience. It doesn't have anything to do with the First Amendment. In CNN, John Passantino called the letter an election season gift to Republicans.

Starting point is 00:11:24 In recent days, the Metta chief executive has made newsworthy public statements implicitly supporting right-wing censorship narratives and offered praise for Donald Trump as badass, even as he claimed he wanted to appear neutral and nonpartisan, Passatino wrote. and censorship came despite a 6-3 decision this summer by the Supreme Court ruling that the federal government had not overstepped by asking platforms to take down potential misinformation. But Zuckerberg's letter publicly played into the hands of Republicans, who have long falsely claimed that social media platforms colluded with liberal government officials to censor conservative voices. In recent years, the platforms run by Zuckerberg and billionaire Trump supporter Elon Musk have eliminated many of the guardrails designed to reduce the spread of viral misinformation,

Starting point is 00:12:11 including allowing Trump to return after he was banned in the wake of the January 6th attack, Passantino wrote. The remarks show Zuckerberg offering Republicans an olive branch ahead of the election and some political ammunition to wit. In Bloomberg, Dave Lee wrote, Zuckerberg's free speech mea culpa is a sleight of hand. Zuckerberg is bending Jordan's committee

Starting point is 00:12:31 to his own benefit, repackaging old apologies or statements and taking the chance to shore up his company's defenses against undue government pressure in the future, no matter who ends up being in the White House in January, Lee said. Jordan's investigation began with a desired conclusion before working backward to pick up whatever shred of questionable evidence it could find to support it, contorting acceptable acts of social network governance into high crimes against freedom of speech. The committee's efforts have achieved little other than noisy headlines. With his letter, Zuckerberg gives Jordan his I-told-you-so moment and a chance to look as if he's achieved something. But the letter's critical admissions had been made publicly long ago, Lee wrote. Zuckerberg's letter is more evidence that the 40-year-old has gained considerable wisdom in his years as a regular Capitol Hill punching bag. He's given Jordan

Starting point is 00:13:20 his hollow victory lap while giving up nothing his company hadn't already surrendered. I'd call that capitalizing, not capitulating. All right, that is it for what the left is saying, which brings us to what the right is saying. The right feels vindicated by the letter, noting that Zuckerberg affirmed several narratives once branded as conspiracies. Some say Zuckerberg's mea culpa is not believable. Others say the letter tacitly admits that Meta made content decisions based on government requests. In USA Today, Nicole Russell said, In USA Today, Nicole Russell said,

Starting point is 00:14:03 Republicans were right. It's sad but not shocking that Joe Biden's White House pressured a major social media company to block America's access to information deemed by government censors as inappropriate. Stories about government interference with Facebook and Twitter, now known as X, have been swirling for some time, Russell wrote. But the fact that Zuckerberg has acknowledged

Starting point is 00:14:23 years after the fact that the Biden-Harris administration repeatedly pressured the company to censor content, even jokes, during the pandemic is quite damning. When something like Zuckerberg's letter becomes public, an idea that Democrats have long claimed is petty and false turns out to be true. I wonder if the same thing could be happening with other important issues, Russell said. I wonder if the same thing could be happening with other important issues, Russell said. In fact, Zuckerberg pointed to one such issue in his letter Monday. He said that the FBI warned Meta about a potential Russian disinformation operation before the 2020 election involving the Biden family and Burisma. Zuckerberg said that Meta no longer demotes posts in the United States

Starting point is 00:15:01 while waiting for fact-checkers to complete their work. In the Las Vegas Review-Journal, Deborah J. Saunders wrote, Zuckerberg says Facebook will be neutral, too little, too late. I don't believe Zuckerberg's claim for a minute. I don't believe that Facebook will stand up to government pressure if Kamala Harris wins in November. Methinks the social media giant will resist only if Donald Trump wins, Saunders said. And really, Zuckerberg must think his critics are absolute idiots if he believes they'll buy his newfound support for,

Starting point is 00:15:30 as his letter claimed, promoting speech and helping people contact in a safe and secure way. No, that's the lie Silicon Valley tells to make big tech look open to dissenting viewpoints. The man ranked the fourth richest person in the world by Forbes has contributed to the occasional Republican, but when Zuckerberg contributed directly to campaigns, the overwhelming share of his largesse went to Democrats. Of course, Zuckerberg is free to direct his money toward the political causes he holds dear, but he is not going to convince conservatives that he is neutral. In the Wall Street Journal, Philip Hamburger described the tell in Zuckerberg's letter. It's important to look closely at what the letter says and what it doesn't. On the one hand, Mr. Zuckerberg concedes what is obvious by now, that there is much government pressure for

Starting point is 00:16:14 censorship, Hamburger said. On the other hand, he distances meta-censorship decisions from the government pressure. Zuckerberg, and surely his lawyers, thus admits both the pressure and the social media censorship, but carefully keeps the two apart. Zuckerberg isn't denying that the government caused some of Meta's censorship decisions. The letter is too carefully drafted to say something so obviously untrue, Hamburger said. The closest the letter comes to admitting causation is Mr. Zuckerberg's assertion that he told his teams at the time that we should not compromise our content standards due to pressure from any administration in either direction, and we're ready to push back if something like this happens again. This sounds like bold defiance, but if something like this happens again suggests that Meta didn't

Starting point is 00:16:58 push back when it happened before, a backhanded admission that government pressure caused Meta to compromise. All right, let's head over to Isaac for his take. So Mark Zuckerberg's letter is written in a way that allows people to see what they want to see. For Republicans and many conservative voters, it's a confirmation of a giant government conspiracy to pressure the platform and interfere in the 2020 election. Zuckerberg says explicitly that he was pressured by the Biden administration in 2021 to remove content that included humor and satire about COVID-19 vaccines. And he says his team acted erroneously on warnings from the FBI about a purported Russian disinformation campaign when he temporarily throttled the Hunter Biden story. For people

Starting point is 00:17:57 on the right, this is an affirmation of all their worst fears. For Democrats and many liberal voters, it's another wink-wink to conservative conspiracy theories from a billionaire tech mogul, and it plays directly into narratives that have been carefully cultivated by figures like Donald Trump. To people on the left, Zuckerberg should be viewed as someone acting purely out of self-interest, not as someone blowing the whistle on government corruption. Unsurprisingly, I think there is some merit to be seen through both of these lenses. My headline reading is that I unequivocally think Zuckerberg writing and releasing this letter is a good thing. He is sending a strong signal to the federal government,

Starting point is 00:18:35 no matter who is leading it, that one of the world's biggest social media companies is going to hold its ground on content moderation decisions going forward. He is correct, self-evidently, that the government has tried to exert pressure on companies like Facebook to moderate their content in ways the government sees fit, which is a dangerous precedent leaders like him should reject. While I've never supported the federal government exerting the kind of pressure Facebook insiders have described on social media companies, I think there are some instances with vaccine information, for example, where it's easy to understand why they would. It is simultaneously true that legitimate arguments about COVID-19 vaccines were stifled online and that health

Starting point is 00:19:17 outcomes for people who got COVID after being vaccinated were still much better. So federal health agencies had an obvious incentive to do things that would help people get vaccinated. In a similar vein, it is simultaneously true that Facebook throttled the Hunter Biden laptop story, which could have impacted the 2020 election, and that by doing so, they didn't actually limit the reach of the story.

Starting point is 00:19:41 They gave it more legs. Remember, Facebook only briefly slowed the story's sharing, as did Twitter. It then went full-blown Streisand effect. The story was front and center in public discourse for weeks leading up to the election. Personally, I never thought Russia had anything to do with the story. I thought it reeked of a lowbrow political hit job, but I was also adamantly opposed to Facebook and Twitter limiting its reach. More to the point, I covered it for weeks and months on end, and I still am in 2024. All this is to say content moderation decisions for the world's largest social media companies,

Starting point is 00:20:16 balancing free speech with public health and government pressure, are complicated, and they have complicated outcomes, which raises another point worth saying plainly here. This letter relates to decisions that Zuckerberg and Facebook made, and Zuckerberg released it at a time when Facebook is being investigated by the House. It's hard to tell if his letter and other recent comments praising Trump is some genuine shift away from the left akin to what we've seen from tech leaders like Elon Musk and others. But given the timing, it's perhaps more plausible that he's acting out of self-interest, giving Republicans messaging ammunition without admitting wrongdoing

Starting point is 00:20:54 to placate them over their investigation into his company. Whatever his motivation, Zuckerberg still outlines solid standards. The government can ask social media platforms to remove content, but they have no obligation to do so. Hopefully Zuckerberg has learned from his past mistakes and future administrations have learned from Biden's mistakes too. We'll be right back after this quick break.

Starting point is 00:21:27 The faster money and data move, the further your business can go to a seamless digital future for Canadians. Let's go faster forward together. In life, interact. Oh, that coffee smells good. Can you pass me the sugar when you're finished? Whoa, whoa, whoa. What are you doing?

Starting point is 00:21:48 That's salt, not sugar. Let's get you another coffee. Feeling distracted? You're not alone. Many Canadians are finding it hard to focus with mortgage payments on their minds. If you're struggling with your payments, speak to your bank. The earlier they understand your situation, the more options and relief measures could be available to you. Learn more at Canada.ca slash it pays to know.

Starting point is 00:22:09 A message from the Government of Canada. Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. All right, that is it for my take, which brings us to your questions answered. This one's from Nate in Fountain, Colorado. Nate said, this is a thought experiment that has been on my mind for some time. If you, Isaac Saul, were to moderate a U.S. presidential debate in 2024 as

Starting point is 00:23:01 the chair for a three to five person panel, who would you choose as the other panelists? Obviously, you represent the center, at least the person who has a demonstrated record of attempting to avoid bias in his reporting and dispassionately assess both sides of an argument. Thank you, Nate. Would you select big name independent figures like Bill O'Reilly for the right and Jon Stewart for the left, or mainstream names like Sean Hannity and Anderson Cooper? Or do you have a dream team of relative unknowns who would properly represent their political preference and present fair questions without letting the event degrade into partisan farce? All right, so I love this question. I would definitely not pick someone like Jon Stewart,

Starting point is 00:23:40 a comedian, or Sean Hannity pretending to be a journalist. Bill O'Reilly is interesting. He's more of a straight shooter than a lot of his ex-colleagues, but he's still very partisan. I had a very good time interviewing him, though, and he makes for great TV, which is a plus. Anderson Cooper is actually a nice mirror to Bill O'Reilly, clearly a lefty who claims he's centrist, and if I had them together, it'd bring some balance. Cooper, though, is a far better correspondent reporting from on the ground than he is an interviewer. Five is probably too many panelists for a debate, and I don't think I need to be involved, so I'll pick four people to ask questions. Since nobody is genuinely in the middle, I would pick two people who are center-ish and two overt partisans.

Starting point is 00:24:26 First, I'd tap Jonathan Swan, who in my opinion is the best interviewer alive right now. His interview with Trump in 2020 makes a lot of people think he is a liberal, but the reality is he is just a tough interviewer who asks sharp questions and thinks quickly on his feet. As far as I can tell, he is pretty close to the center, or at least does his job in a fair way,

Starting point is 00:24:46 even if he sometimes tips his hand to being left of center. Second, I'd choose former BBC broadcaster Andrew Neil. First, because I think it would be good to have someone who doesn't just focus on US issues on the panel. Second, because he is a fantastic interviewer. And third, because even though he is conservative, the way he interviews conservatives is pretty incredible. He is a total pit bull.

Starting point is 00:25:10 Just go look at his interview with Ben Shapiro. Third, for my liberal panelists, I'd choose Mehdi Hassan. He's simply one of the sharpest interviewers I've ever seen. And importantly, he has experience doing interviews on live television and scrapping with political opponents in front of an audience. Other potential panelists like Isaac Chotner can ask biting gotcha questions like he does in his interviews in The New Yorker, but I've never seen him do live TV or debates.

Starting point is 00:25:38 The fourth and final spot for my conservative panelists would go to Katherine Harich, the recently fired CBS reporter. She is an incredible journalist who knows how the sausage is made at the major networks and has broken a lot of very important stories other reporters won't touch. She also seems unafraid of upsetting the masses. Other potential panelists for this spot,

Starting point is 00:25:58 like Tucker Carlson or Ben Shapiro, come to mind, but they would just spend too much time pontificating and not enough time actually asking good questions. With Herridge and Neal, the panel would have genuine and sharp conservative representation. So that's my dream panel. Jonathan Swan, Andrew Neal, Mehdi Hassan,

Starting point is 00:26:15 Catherine Herridge. It'd be a raucous time. All right, that is it for your questions answered. I'm going to send it back to John for the rest of the pod. Don't forget to subscribe to get tomorrow's mailbag and we'll see you on Sunday. Have a good weekend. Peace. Thanks, Isaac. Here's your under the radar story for today, folks. According to a new report from Fidelity Investments, a record number of 401k accounts have breached the million dollar threshold. Last quarter, Fidelity managed about

Starting point is 00:26:45 497,000 401k millionaires, representing a 2.5% increase from 485,000 accounts in the first quarter of 2024. Fidelity's analysis includes 24 million accounts across 26,000 employer-sponsored plans and shows that the average 401k account balance is up 13% from a year ago, while the average IRA account is up 14%. Retirement savers in the second quarter of 2024 benefited from the continued upswing of the previous quarter, while contribution levels and average account balance has reached record highs, said Shannon Bravelli, president of Workplace Investing at Fidelity Investments. The Hill has this story, and there's a link in today's episode description.

Starting point is 00:27:33 All right, next up is our numbers section. The approximate number of pieces of content removed from Facebook and Instagram in Q2 of 2021 for violating the platform's policies on COVID-19-related misinformation is 20 million, according to Meta. The approximate number of accounts, pages, and groups removed from Facebook and Instagram in Q2 of 2021 for repeatedly violating the platform's rules against spreading COVID-19 and vaccine misinformation is 3,000. The approximate number of warnings displayed by Meta in Q2 of 2021 on COVID-related content on Facebook that its third-party fact-checking partners rated as false, partly false, altered, or missing content was 190 million. The percentage of U.S. adults who believe the U.S. government should take steps to restrict false information online is 55%, up 16% from 2018, according to Pew Research. The percentage of U.S. adults who

Starting point is 00:28:31 believe tech companies should take steps to restrict false information online is 65%, up 9% from 2018. The percentage of U.S. adults who believe freedom of information should be protected, even if it means false information can be published, is 42%, down 16% from 2018. The percentage of Americans who don't trust the government to make fair decisions about what information is allowed to be posted on social media platforms is 64%, according to the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. And the percentage of Republicans and Democrats, respectively, who don't trust the government to make fair decisions

Starting point is 00:29:07 about what information is allowed to be posted on social media is 79% and 52%. And last but not least, our Have a Nice Day story. Rebecca and Josh Hampton, two young siblings in Chesapeake, Virginia, decided to start a familiar

Starting point is 00:29:24 summertime venture for kids, a lemonade stand at the end of their driveway. They had earned about $40 in sales when a young man approached them, acting like a customer, and robbed them of their earnings. He has since been arrested. Undeterred, the Hamptons opened their stand the next weekend, and they received a boost of support from their community.

Starting point is 00:29:43 Neighbors, firefighters, city council members, police officers, and motorcycle groups all came together to help the siblings pull in over $6,200 in sales. 13 News Now has this story and there's a link in today's episode description. All right, everybody, that's it for today's episode. As always, if you'd like to support our work,

Starting point is 00:30:03 please go to retangle.com and sign up for a membership. After a long week at the DNC and battling a bit of a cold at this point, I think I'm taking this weekend to recover. I'm hoping that y'all get some time to yourselves as well and get a chance to truly enjoy yourselves, however that may look. Isaac and Ari will be on the mic for the Sunday podcast

Starting point is 00:30:24 and I will return on Monday. For the rest of the crew, this is John Law signing off. Have a fantastic weekend, y'all. Peace. Our podcast is written by me, Isaac Saul, and edited and engineered by Duke Thomas. Our script is edited by Ari Weitzman, Will Kabak, Daily Saul, and Sean Brady.

Starting point is 00:30:44 The logo for our podcast was made by Magdalena Pikova, who is also our social media manager. The music for the podcast was produced by Diet75. And if you're looking for more from Tangle, please go check out our website at readtangle.com. That's readtangle.com. dot com

Tangle - Mark Zuckerberg’s Letter to Congress

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.