Connect with us

Business

Will Meta’s Plan to End Fact Checking Work Politically?

Published

on

Will Meta’s Plan to End Fact Checking Work Politically?

Meta’s bombshell announcement on Tuesday that it would end its fact-checking program was widely read as a major shift in policy meant to please President-elect Donald Trump and other conservatives.

In reality, the move was probably less radical than it initially seemed. But the turn still serves as a reminder that many corporate leaders see their highest priority as reading the room — one that Trump now dominates.

Mark Zuckerberg has been moving in this direction for some time. In relation to the 2016 election, the Meta chief, who has a history of tacking where political winds blow, followed other tech companies in partnering with fact-checking groups to police content on its platforms, including Facebook and Instagram. Since then, however, the tech mogul has fumed as Meta was criticized for both failing to do enough — and for removing too many user posts.

“It’s time to get back to our roots around free expression,” Zuckerberg said in a video announcing the changes, including a move to X-style user-policing known as Community Notes. (Katie Harbath, a former communications executive at Meta, told The Times, “This is an evolved return to his political origins.”)

The changes aren’t necessarily as big as they first appeared. Politico noted that Meta had been paring back its moderation efforts in recent years. And while Zuckerberg promoted plans to move such workers to Texas to “eliminate bias,” many such workers are already based there.

Advertisement

Zuckerberg isn’t alone: Tech companies haven’t ever wanted to be in the business of moderating user content. Last summer, YouTube began testing a version of Community Notes, though it was described as more of a supplemental feature.

Is the political payoff for Meta worth the criticism? Trump, who had railed against the company’s moves to police his content — including briefly shutting down his Facebook account after the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the Capitol — said the tech giant had “come a long way.” (He also said his threats against Zuckerberg “probably” contributed to the new policy.)

Meta executives may hope that, along with the elevation of the longtime Republican executive Joel Kaplan to lead global affairs, a $1 million donation to the Trump inaugural fund and the addition of the Trump ally Dana White to its board, may get them into the president-elect’s good graces.

A factor worth watching: Zuckerberg said he would work with Trump to “push back against foreign governments going after American companies to censor more.” That was a thinly veiled shot against the European Union, which has sought to punish companies, including Meta, for insufficiently policing their platforms — and may increase its scrutiny of the tech giant after Tuesday’s move.

Will the move work? So far, advertisers aren’t publicly objecting. And Tuesday’s news most likely allays concerns that Trump regulatory picks, including Brendan Carr of the Federal Communications Commission, had about Meta.

Advertisement

But Senator Marsha Blackburn, Republican of Tennessee, wrote on X that Meta’s change was simply “a ploy to avoid being regulated.” She added, “We will not be fooled.”

Wildfires near Los Angeles force widespread evacuations. Parts of Santa Monica and the Pacific Palisades were hit by a blaze that destroyed homes and forced at least 30,000 to flee for safety. Another fire, near Pasadena, was also causing issues as officials warned of devastating losses.

Anthropic is close to raising billions more in capital. The artificial intelligence start-up is in advanced talks to collect $2 billion in a round led by Lightspeed Venture Partners, The Times reports. If completed, the fund-raising would value Anthropic at $60 billion — roughly three times as much as it was worth a year ago — in another sign that the deal making frenzy around A.I. shows no signs of slowing.

JPMorgan Chase reportedly plans to call employees back to the office five days a week. That’s up from the requirement of three days a week, according to Bloomberg, though about 60 percent of Wall Street giant’s staff is already at the office full time. Other major companies have already reduced or eliminated work-from-home policies instituted during the coronavirus pandemic; JPMorgan’s C.E.O., Jamie Dimon, has long criticized hybrid working arrangements.

Coming into 2025, the big questions hanging over President-elect Donald Trump’s second term included tax cuts, the Fed’s independence and potential new trade war.

Advertisement

But few could have foreseen the president-elect refusing to rule out military force or economic coercion against allies as he did on Tuesday at a wide-ranging news conference at Mar-a-Lago. It underscores that for markets, a Trump presidency brings plenty of potential black swan events.

A recap: Trump revealed an expansive vision of “America First,” doubling down on calls for the United States to gain control of Greenland and the Panama Canal. And he spoke of renaming the Gulf of Mexico to the “Gulf of America,” though it was unclear how serious he was about that.

The Trump effect can be seen in the markets on Wednesday. The S&P 500 looks set to open lower, and sectors like green energy and companies including Tesla slumped after Trump railed on Tuesday about wind turbines and grumbled about electric vehicles.

And the yield on the 10-year Treasury note hit a roughly nine-month high on Tuesday, a worrying sign for house hunters and credit-card holders.

Some market watchers still believe that markets could check the Trump agenda. Bond vigilantes could act as a brake on Trump’s policies if they reignite inflation.

Advertisement

And more broadly, the Trump team cares “about the verdict of financial markets,” Holger Schmieding, an economist at Berenberg, wrote in a research note on Wednesday. “If their actions were to impair the potential for growth and corporate earnings badly enough to trigger a sell-off, they might change tack.”

There are signs that might prove true. Trump acknowledged on Tuesday that it would be “hard” to bring down consumer prices, a major shift from what he told supporters on the campaign trail. His big inflation-fighting idea, expanding oil drilling, hasn’t yet affected the markets, with crude oil prices on a steady rise in recent weeks. (President Biden’s ban on new oil exploration in vast stretches of U.S. waters has contributed to that price surge, and may be hard for Trump to undo.)

That said, the VIX volatility index, known as Wall Street’s fear gauge, has been stable for weeks, a sign that equity investors are still bullish.


Donald Trump’s transition team has already amassed a mega budget to throw an inauguration bash for the ages.

And the president-elect can thank the giants of the tech industry and Wall Street — some of the same figures who’ve met with him recently at Mar-a-Lago — for the record haul of at least $150 million. Few federal rules govern how Trump and his associates can spend the money.

Advertisement

Donors who have gone public include: Amazon, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Meta and Uber. Executives such as Tim Cook of Apple, Dara Khosrowshahi of Uber and Sam Altman of OpenAI have also chipped in.

Contributing to inauguration funds has become a corporate America tradition. “You’re giving money directly to the incoming president with no risk of backing the wrong horse,” Craig Holman, a lobbyist with Public Citizen, a consumer rights watchdog, told DealBook’s Sarah Kessler. Donors who give $1 million to the fund receive tickets to the inauguration plus other events such as a reception with cabinet picks and a pre-inauguration dinner with Trump.

There are only a few restrictions. Foreign nationals are not allowed to donate, and donations over $200 must be disclosed. And anti-bribery laws apply. “Beyond that, it’s pretty much open in terms of who may contribute and how they may spend it,” said Kenneth Gross, a lawyer specializing in campaign finance at Akin Gump.

The inauguration fund pays for the parties, dinners and the parade, while taxpayers foot the bill for security and the swearing-in ceremony.

What will happen to unspent funds? Two people involved in the fund-raising for Trump’s inauguration told The Times that donors expected the remaining money to go to Trump’s presidential library.

Advertisement

The last time, Trump’s team raised $107 million (the previous record). It was later revealed that a nearly $26 million payment went to an event planning firm created by an adviser to the first lady, Melania Trump.

Lawmakers have sought to change things. One bill introduced in 2023 would limit contributions to $50,000. But such efforts have gained little traction.


Corporate treasury departments are usually bastions of caution, preferring to invest their companies’ money in stable assets like Treasury bonds. But a growing number are choosing to go a different route by investing in crypto.

By one estimate, more than 70 publicly traded companies have invested in Bitcoin, despite some having nothing to do with crypto. At least a few have been inspired by MicroStrategy, a software company that began amassing Bitcoin in 2020 — and now sits on a stockpile worth over $40 billion. MicroStrategy’s stock price is up roughly tenfold over the past 18 months.

But it means that those companies are putting their money in a highly volatile asset that could imperil their finances if things go wrong, The Times’s David Yaffe-Bellany and Joe Rennison write:

Advertisement

The investments are a sharp pivot away from the cautious approach of the traditional corporate treasury department, whose focus is typically safeguarding cash rather than risking it for a higher return. Typical reserve assets include steady, predictable securities like U.S. government bonds and money market funds.

“I cannot understand how a risk-averse board could justify an investment in digital assets, given we know they swing quite significantly,” said Naresh Agarwal, an associate director at the Association of Corporate Treasurers, a trade organization. “It is quite an opaque market.”

Some investors aren’t on board with this new tactic. When Banzai, a publicly traded marketing firm, decided to invest in Bitcoin, some shareholders expressed alarm. Joe Davy, its C.E.O., told The Times: “I got a couple of phone calls from people who were like: ‘What the hell is going on over there? What are you thinking?’”

Deals

Politics and policy

  • The Justice Department added six major landlords, including Blackstone’s LivCor, to a price-fixing lawsuit against the real estate software company RealPage. (WSJ)

  • Theodore Farnsworth, the former C.E.O. of MoviePass’s parent company, pleaded guilty to fraud over misleading investors about the business’ “unlimited” subscription plan. (NYT)

Best of the rest

Advertisement

We’d like your feedback! Please email thoughts and suggestions to dealbook@nytimes.com.

Business

Schwab Affiliate Halts Customer Donations to Southern Poverty Law Center

Published

on

Schwab Affiliate Halts Customer Donations to Southern Poverty Law Center

The donor-advised fund affiliated with Charles Schwab, DAFgiving360, has suspended account holders’ ability to give money to the Southern Poverty Law Center, a civil rights group.

Last week, the Justice Department indicted the group and accused it of financial crimes. This week, the donor-advised funds that bear Fidelity’s and Vanguard’s names also cut the group off.

A spokeswoman for the Schwab-affiliated fund said, “If a governing body of a charity declares an investigation into a charity it oversees, DAFgiving360 may suspend grants to the organization.” She would not provide a list of other organizations that it has suspended.

Donor-advised funds allow individuals to create accounts, donate cash or securities into them and take a tax deduction for the full amount that year. Then they can parcel out donations to charities and other nonprofits over many years.

“Giving to your favorite charity has never been easier” is the language that DAFgiving360 uses on its website. Charles Schwab lists the account balance right next to investment account balances on its own website.

Advertisement

DAFgiving360 is also careful, however, to use specific language that gets to the legal reality of how the funds work. Users can “recommend” grants to “eligible” charities, for example, which means DAFgiving360 controls the money and the account holder is technically just advising.

This is almost never a practical issue for account holders; donor-advised funds generally rubber-stamp donation requests. But in the wake of the criminal indictment, which accused the S.P.L.C. of paying informants money that contributed to the extremism that it opposes, President Trump said he believed that the S.P.L.C. was behind the racist Charlottesville, Va., riots in 2017.

Mr. Trump did not provide evidence for his allegations against the center. And many Fidelity and Vanguard customers are furious about the move against the S.P.L.C.

DAFgiving360 customers are expressing similar sentiments. “This is too safe a position, and they shouldn’t have done it,” Jani Rachelson, a retired labor lawyer in New Jersey who was unable to donate to the S.P.L.C., said of Schwab’s action. “Compliance in advance is the scourge of our life these days.

DAFgiving360 said in its statement that it applies its policies consistently across all charitable organizations, regardless of political viewpoint or orientation. In the past, a Schwab predecessor charitable-fund entity stopped granting money to National Rifle Association-affiliated charities when an active investigation was underway. The N.R.A. does appear in DAFgiving360 search results now for people making grant requests.

Advertisement

Prudent trustees with decision-making authority do consider indictments of charities before approving donations to them.

At Merrill Lynch, however, the donor-advised fund operation relies on the Internal Revenue Service for guidance. Since the agency hasn’t revoked S.P.L.C.’s nonprofit status, Merrill Lynch’s donor-advised funds are allowing donations to go through for now.

Meanwhile, Fidelity’s, Schwab’s and Vanguard’s actions raise complicated questions.

“Why not other charities that have also been attacked by the administration, including many major universities,” said Roger Colinvaux, a nonprofit law expert and professor at Catholic University’s Columbus School of Law, via email. “The incident thus raises questions of how DAF sponsors draw the line and whether they are succumbing to political pressure or advancing their mission.”

In March, the Justice Department filed a civil lawsuit against Harvard University, accusing it of civil rights violations and saying it “tolerated antisemitic mobs of students.” As of Friday morning, the “recommend a grant” page of the DAFgiving360 website returned many options from a “Harvard University” search.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

Google, Nvidia and other tech titans sign AI deal with the Pentagon

Published

on

Google, Nvidia and other tech titans sign AI deal with the Pentagon

Eight technology companies, including Google, Nvidia and SpaceX, have struck deals with the Pentagon to help the U.S. military gain an edge on the battlefield.

“These agreements accelerate the transformation toward establishing the United States military as an AI-first fighting force and will strengthen our warfighters’ ability to maintain decision superiority across all domains of warfare,” the Department of Defense said Friday.

The companies will deploy their AI technology on the department’s “classified networks” for “lawful operational use,” according to the agency.

OpenAI, Microsoft, Amazon Web Services, Oracle and AI startup Reflection are among the companies that agreed to work with the Pentagon.

The agreements underscore how tech companies are expanding their work with the U.S. military even as some workers raise concerns about the use of AI for autonomous weapons and mass surveillance. Anthropic, the San Francisco company behind the chatbot Claude, clashed with the Pentagon earlier this year over whether there were adequate safeguards around the military’s use of its technology.

Advertisement

The Department of Defense accused Anthropic of trying to “seize veto power” over military decisions, though the company pushed back against that characterization. The agency labeled Anthropic a supply chain risk, and the Trump administration directed federal agencies to stop using the company’s tools, setting off a legal battle over that designation.

This week, hundreds of Google employees urged its chief executive, Sundar Pichai, to reject the use of its AI systems for classified workloads to ensure that its technology isn’t used in “inhumane or extremely harmful ways.” Harmful use may occur without their knowledge since the work is classified, workers said in the letter.

Google, Reflection and SpaceX didn’t respond to a request for comment. The Department of Defense didn’t say how much each company was being paid. A Pentagon official said some of the companies have active contracts while others have made agreements but formal contract are forthcoming.

In an interview with CNBC, the Pentagon’s chief technology officer, Emil Michael, said the department wanted to diversify the companies it worked with following its dispute with Anthropic.

“Guardrails are something that are negotiable based on what they are with all the companies, and they have different views on that,” he told CNBC. The guardrails also have to be consistent with the government’s values and restrictions, he added.

Advertisement

A source familiar with Nvidia’s Pentagon deal said the agreement involves work with its “Nemotron” AI models, which are used to build AI agents that can complete tasks, not its chips. The deal includes language that the use of the models will be consistent with civil liberties, constitutional rights and applicable law, the source said.

OpenAI said the deal announced by the Department of Defense refers to the agreement they struck with the agency earlier this year.

The company said that it wanted “the people defending the United States to have the best tools.”

OpenAI, which faced backlash for striking a deal with the Pentagon after the Anthropic fallout, said in March that its technology wouldn’t be used for mass domestic surveillance, high-stakes automated decisions or to direct autonomous weapons.

Other tech companies, such as Microsoft, Oracle and Amazon Web Services, have also said they want to support the military and ensure they have access to the best AI tools.

Advertisement

“We look forward to continuing to support the Department of War’s modernization efforts, building AI solutions that help them accomplish their critical missions,” Amazon Web Services spokesperson Tim Barrett said in a statement.

Continue Reading

Business

Stocks and Oil Prices Sent Conflicting Signals in April Amid Havoc of Iran War

Published

on

Stocks and Oil Prices Sent Conflicting Signals in April Amid Havoc of Iran War

Lately, financial markets appear confused.

Oil prices recently hit their highest level since the start of the war in Iran, stoking broad worries about inflation and a global energy crisis.

Yet, it has been the best month for the stock market of President Trump’s second term. The S&P 500 ended April nearly 10 percent higher than where it ended March.

The last time the index rose more than 10 percent in a month was in November 2020, after Joseph R. Biden Jr. was elected president and early trials for Covid-19 vaccines showed promising results. On Friday, the S&P 500 rose a further 0.5 percent, putting it on course for a fifth straight week of gains.

To many outside observers, it seems incongruous that the oil market can be sending such a dour signal, while stocks reflect a strong sense of investor optimism.

Advertisement

But in this unusual moment, according to analysts and traders, bullish and bearish market signals can both be true.

While the stock market reacts to day-to-day news, it is primarily concerned with how that news affects the longer-term outlook for company earnings. Stocks initially fell when the United States and Israel attacked Iran on Feb. 28, reflecting uncertainty about the war’s duration, its impact on energy supplies and the fallout for corporate America.

Stocks began to rise again after the Trump administration and Iran started to de-escalate at the end of March, moving toward a cease-fire on April 8. The standoff between the countries has not ended, a peace agreement has not been reached, but for stock investors, the expectation is that the disruption to oil markets and supply chains won’t last much longer.

And the economic impact of the war, at least as far as the United States is concerned, has been manageable. Data on Thursday showed that the U.S. economy grew at an annual pace of 2 percent in the first three months of this year, boosted by spending on infrastructure by many of the big tech companies that have led the S&P 500 stock index to repeated new highs.

This week, Alphabet, Amazon, Microsoft and Meta, which collectively account for 20 percent of the S&P 500’s market value, said they had spent a combined $130 billion on data centers. The share prices of these members of the so-called Magnificent 7, a group of companies that also include Apple, Nvidia and Tesla, rose nearly 15 percent in April.

Advertisement

Strong earnings in other industries have also buoyed the market. Roughly a third of the companies in the S&P 500 have reported their financial results for the first quarter, and their average growth in earnings stands at roughly 15 percent, on course for a sixth straight double-digit quarterly rise.

Oil prices are a much shorter-term measure of investor sentiment than stock indexes. The oil market is primarily traded using futures contracts, which are derivatives that fix the price today for delivery at a specified date in the future. The most frequently cited oil prices refer to the next month or two. That means that changes in the conflict that could extend or shorten its duration by a few weeks show up in the price of oil but not necessarily in the stock market. Oil traders are fixated on the price of a barrel of crude in July, for example, while pension fund managers are thinking about market returns many years in the future.

This week, a deadlock over the future of Iran’s nuclear program appeared to threaten the fragile cease-fire with the United States, helping to push the price of Brent crude, the international oil benchmark, to a four-year high, of over $120 per barrel on Thursday.

But investors appear to anticipate some sort of resolution the further out they look. Futures contracts for deliveries of Brent crude in December still trade below $90 a barrel.

“While the geopolitical environment remains fluid on a day-to-day basis, markets appear to be assigning a higher probability to a relatively near-term U.S. exit from the Middle East, alongside a normalization in global supply chains that could ultimately pressure oil prices lower,” said Adam Turnquist, chief technical strategist at LPL Financial.

Advertisement

The timing of the Trump administration’s announcements of important changes in policy in the conflict with Iran have, to some extent, exacerbated the appearance of market moves — both on the way down and the way back up.

The war began after the market closed on the final day of February and the cease-fire was announced on the final day of March, so the stock market’s losses were concentrated in March and the recovery almost entirely captured in April.

There are reasons for trepidation among stock investors as the war enters its third month.

The conflict could drag on for longer than is currently expected. Oil prices with Brent futures contracts from September through November have all started to rise, moving above $90 in just over the past week. Although that means traders still expect the price of oil to drift downward in the coming months, crude is increasingly expected to stay elevated for longer, weighing on the economy. The government’s bond market also shows signs of lingering inflation risks stemming from the war, analysts have noted.

Many investors have also expressed a lack of conviction in the current rally, which is evident in the way investors are trading. Stock market trading volumes have been subdued through April, with some investors saying they have turned to the derivatives market to place bets on the market going higher, allowing them to profit if the rally continues but limit losses if the market falls again.

Advertisement

“As long as the economy continues to grow and companies are able to grow earnings, we can see higher stock prices even in the face of higher energy prices and inflation,” said Chris Zaccarelli, chief investment officer at Northlight Asset Management. “However, the longer the war drags on, the more investors will grow nervous and we could see some pullbacks as fears ebb and flow.”

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending