Politics

Inside Mark Zuckerberg’s Sprint to Remake Meta for the Trump Era

Published

1 year ago

January 10, 2025

Inside Mark Zuckerberg’s Sprint to Remake Meta for the Trump Era

Mark Zuckerberg kept the circle of people who knew his thinking small.

Last month, Mr. Zuckerberg, the chief executive of Meta, tapped a handful of top policy and communications executives and others to discuss the company’s approach to online speech. He had decided to make sweeping changes after visiting President-elect Donald J. Trump at Mar-a-Lago over Thanksgiving. Now he needed his employees to turn those changes into policy.

Over the next few weeks, Mr. Zuckerberg and his handpicked team discussed how to do that in Zoom meetings, conference calls and late-night group chats. Some subordinates stole away from family dinners and holiday gatherings to work, while Mr. Zuckerberg weighed in between trips to his homes in the San Francisco Bay Area and the island of Kauai.

By New Year’s Day, Mr. Zuckerberg was ready to go public with the changes, according to four current and former Meta employees and advisers with knowledge of the events, who were not authorized to speak publicly about the confidential discussions.

The entire process was highly unusual. Meta typically alters policies that govern its apps — which include Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp and Threads — by inviting employees, civic leaders and others to weigh in. Any shifts generally take months. But Mr. Zuckerberg turned this latest effort into a closely held six-week sprint, blindsiding even employees on his policy and integrity teams.

On Tuesday, most of Meta’s 72,000 employees learned of Mr. Zuckerberg’s plans along with the rest of the world. The Silicon Valley giant said it was overhauling speech on its apps by loosening restrictions on how people can talk about contentious social issues such as immigration, gender and sexuality. It killed its fact-checking program that had been aimed at curbing misinformation and said it would instead rely on users to police falsehoods. And it said it would insert more political content into people’s feeds after previously de-emphasizing that very material.

In the days since, the moves — which have sweeping implications for what people will see online — have drawn applause from Mr. Trump and conservatives, derision from fact-checking groups and misinformation researchers, and concerns from L.G.B.T.Q. advocacy groups that fear the changes will lead to more people getting harassed online and offline.

Inside Meta, the reaction has been sharply divided. Some employees have celebrated the moves, while others were shocked and have openly castigated the changes on the company’s internal message boards. Several employees wrote that they were ashamed to work for Meta.

On Friday, Meta’s makeover continued when the company told employees that it would end its work on diversity, equity and inclusion. It eliminated its chief diversity officer role, ended its diversity hiring goals that called for the employment of a certain number of women and minorities, and said it would no longer prioritize minority-owned businesses when hiring vendors.

Meta planned to “focus on how to apply fair and consistent practices that mitigate bias for all, no matter your background,” Janelle Gale, vice president of human resources, said in an internal post that was relayed to The New York Times.

In interviews, more than a dozen current and former Meta employees, executives and advisers to Mr. Zuckerberg described his shift as serving a dual purpose. It positions Meta for the political landscape of the moment, with conservative power ascendant in Washington as Mr. Trump takes office on Jan. 20. More than that, the changes reflect Mr. Zuckerberg’s personal views of how his $1.5 trillion company should be run — and he no longer wants to keep those views quiet.

Mr. Zuckerberg, 40, has regularly spoken to friends and colleagues, including Marc Andreessen, the venture capitalist and Meta board member, about concerns that progressives are policing speech, the people said. He has also felt railroaded by what he views as the Biden administration’s anti-tech posturing, and stung by what he sees as progressives in the media and in Silicon Valley — including in Meta’s work force — pushing him to take a heavy hand in policing discourse, they said.

Meta declined to comment.

In an interview with the podcaster Joe Rogan on Friday, Mr. Zuckerberg said it was time to go “back to our original mission” by giving people “the power to share.” He said he had felt pressured by the Biden administration and the media to “censor” certain content, adding, “I have a much greater command now of what I think the policy should be, and this is how it’s going to be going forward.”

The latest changes were catalyzed by Mr. Trump’s victory in November. That month, Mr. Zuckerberg flew to Florida to meet with Mr. Trump at Mar-a-Lago. Meta later donated $1 million to the president-elect’s inaugural fund.

At Meta, Mr. Zuckerberg began preparing to change speech policies. Knowing that any moves would be contentious, he assembled a team of no more than a dozen close advisers and lieutenants, including Joel Kaplan, a longtime policy executive with strong ties to the Republican Party; Kevin Martin, the head of U.S. policy; and David Ginsberg, the head of communications. Mr. Zuckerberg insisted on no leaks, the people with knowledge of the effort said.

The group worked on revising Meta’s “Hate Speech” policy, with Mr. Zuckerberg leading the charge, they said. They changed the name of the policy, which lays out what to do with slurs, threats against protected groups and other harmful content on its apps, to “Hateful Conduct.”

That effectively shifted the emphasis of the rules away from speech, minimizing Meta’s role in policing online conversation. Mr. Kaplan and Mr. Martin were cheerleaders of the changes, these people said.

Mr. Zuckerberg decided to promote Mr. Kaplan to Meta’s head of global public policy to carry out the changes and deepen Meta’s ties to the incoming Trump administration, replacing Nick Clegg, a former deputy prime minister of Britain who had handled policy and regulatory issues globally for Meta since 2018. The night before Meta’s announcement, Mr. Kaplan held individual calls with top conservative social media influencers, two people said.

On Tuesday, Mr. Zuckerberg made the new speech policies public in his Instagram video. Mr. Kaplan appeared on “Fox & Friends,” a mainstay of Mr. Trump’s media diet, saying Meta’s fact-checking partners “had too much political bias.”

(Fact-checking groups that worked with Meta have said they had no role in deciding what the company did with the content that was fact-checked.)

Among its changes, Meta loosened rules so people could post statements saying they hated people of certain races, religions or sexual orientations, including permitting “allegations of mental illness or abnormality when based on gender or sexual orientation.” The company cited political discourse about transgender rights for the change. It also removed a rule that forbade users to say people of certain races were responsible for spreading the coronavirus.

Some training materials that Meta created for the new policies were confusing and contradictory, two employees who reviewed the documents said. Some of the text said saying that “white people have mental illness” would be prohibited on Facebook, but saying that “gay people have mental illness” was allowed, they said.

Meta locked access to the policies and training materials internally late on Thursday, they said, hours after The Intercept published excerpts.

The company also removed the transgender and nonbinary “themes” on its Messenger chat app, which allows users to customize the app’s colors and wallpaper, two employees said. The change was reported earlier by 404 Media.

That same day at Meta’s offices in Silicon Valley, Texas and New York, facilities managers were instructed to remove tampons from men’s bathrooms, which the company had provided for nonbinary and transgender employees who use the men’s room and who may have required sanitary pads, two employees said.

Some employees were livid at what they saw as efforts by executives to hide changes to the “Hateful Conduct” policy before it was announced, two people said. While people across the policy division typically view and comment on significant revisions, most did not have the opportunity this time.

On Workplace, Meta’s Slack-like internal communications software, employees began arguing over the changes. In the @Pride employee resource group, where workers who support L.G.B.T.Q. issues convene, at least one person announced their resignation as others privately relayed to one another that they planned to look for jobs elsewhere, two people said.

In a post this week to the @Pride group, Alex Schultz, Meta’s chief marketing officer, defended Mr. Zuckerberg and said topics like transgender issues had become politicized. He said Meta’s policies should not get in the way of allowing societal debate and pointed to Roe v. Wade, the landmark abortion case, as an example of “courts getting ahead of society” in the 1970s. Mr. Schultz said the courts had “politicized” the issue instead of allowing it to be debated civically.

“You find topics become politicized and stay in the political conversation for far longer than they would’ve if society just debated them out,” Mr. Schultz wrote. He said looser restrictions on speech in Meta’s apps would allow for this kind of debate.

Mr. Zuckerberg traveled to Palm Beach, Fla., this week, four people with knowledge of his activities said, and on Friday was said to have been at Mar-a-Lago.

In his interview with Mr. Rogan, Mr. Zuckerberg denied making sweeping changes to appease the incoming Trump administration, but said the election did influence his thinking.

“The good thing about doing it after the election is you get to take this cultural pulse,” he said. “We got to this point where there were these things that you couldn’t say that were just mainstream discourse.”

Theodore Schleifer, Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan contributed reporting.

Click to comment

Politics

Graham pushes back on Tillis’ criticism of Noem, Miller for labeling man killed by Border Patrol a ‘terrorist’

Published

11 hours ago

January 28, 2026

Press Room

Graham pushes back on Tillis’ criticism of Noem, Miller for labeling man killed by Border Patrol a ‘terrorist’

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., on Tuesday defended Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Homeland Security Advisor Stephen Miller after Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., criticized the pair for labeling the U.S. citizen killed by Border Patrol agents in Minneapolis as a “domestic terrorist.”

Tillis was the first Senate Republican to call for Noem to be fired after the killing of Alex Pretti, 37, who was shot by federal agents as he was recording immigration enforcement operations in Minneapolis over the weekend.

“What she’s done in Minnesota should be disqualifying. She should be out of a job,” Tillis told reporters earlier on Tuesday. “It’s just amateur-ish. It’s terrible. It’s making the president look bad on policy that he won on. [President Donald Trump] won on a strong message on immigration. Now, nobody’s talking about that. … They’re talking about the incompetence of the leader of Homeland Security.”

Noem and Miller “told the president before they even had an incident report whatsoever that the person who died was a terrorist. That is amateur hour at its worst,” Tillis added.

SENATE GOP CRITICS SAY NOEM ‘NEEDS TO GO’ AMID FALLOUT FROM MINNEAPOLIS SHOOTINGS

Sen. Lindsey Graham defended Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Homeland Security Advisor Stephen Miller on Tuesday. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

Responding to Tillis, Graham said someone “must have a very high opinion of themselves” if they believe they can get President Donald Trump to distance himself from Miller.

“I’ve known Stephen Miller for a very long time. We have our differences, but we have more in common. When the clock strikes midnight for President Trump, there will be very few by his side. One will be Stephen Miller. If you don’t get that, you’ve missed a lot. No one has helped Trump more than Stephen Miller,” Graham told Fox News’ Chad Pergram.

“To convince yourself that you can get Trump to distance himself from Stephen Miller, you must have a very high opinion of themselves,” he continued.

The South Carolina lawmaker added: “To my Republican colleagues, you need to understand that the President’s confidence in Stephen Miller has been rock solid and unshakable. And Miller is part of that group.”

Sen. Thom Tillis was the first Senate Republican to call for DHS Secretary Kristi Noem to be fired after the killing of Alex Pretti. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

Alex Pretti, 37, was shot and killed on Saturday by Border Patrol agents while recording federal immigration operations in Minneapolis. An ICU nurse, Pretti appeared to be attempting to attend to a woman agents knocked down when he was sprayed with an irritant, pushed to the ground and beaten. An agent was seen pulling Pretti’s lawfully owned gun from his waistband before other agents fired several shots and killed him.

Noem was quick to label Pretti a “domestic terrorist,” and Miller characterized him as things such as a “would-be assassin,” both of which are unsubstantiated claims that sparked bipartisan pushback.

The White House has sought to distance itself from the comments by Noem and Miller, with White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt saying she has “not heard the president characterize” Pretti that way.

But despite calls from Democrat and Republican lawmakers to oust Noem over her response to Pretti’s killing, Trump expressed confidence in the secretary to continue leading DHS.

NY POST, WSJ, NY TIMES AND WASHINGTON POST ALIGN AGAINST TRUMP ADMIN OVER ICE OPERATION IN MINNEAPOLIS

President Donald Trump expressed confidence in DHS Secretary Kristi Noem to continue leading the department. (Demetrius Freeman/The Washington Post via Getty Images)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“I think she’s doing a very good job. The border is totally secure. You know, you forget we had a border that I inherited where millions of people were coming through. Now we have a border where no one is coming through. They come into our country only legally,” Trump told reporters on Tuesday.

Asked if he agreed with Noem and Miller labeling Pretti as a “domestic terrorist” and an “assassin,” the president said he had not heard those remarks.

“Well, I haven’t heard that. He shouldn’t have been carrying a gun,” Trump said.

Trump also said the shooting was a “very sad situation” and he wants a “very honorable and honest investigation” that he wants to see for himself.

Politics

Charter Reform Commission, L.A. City Council look to impose transparency rules

Published

12 hours ago

January 28, 2026

Press Room

Charter Reform Commission, L.A. City Council look to impose transparency rules

The Los Angeles City Council voted Tuesday to approve a law aimed at boosting transparency at the Charter Reform Commission, by requiring that members of that panel disclose any private talks they have with the city’s elected officials.

The vote comes about two months before the commission, which began its work in July, is scheduled to finish its deliberations and deliver a list of recommendations to the council.

Councilmember Monica Rodriguez, who proposed the ordinance, said she has been trying since August to pass a measure requiring the disclosure of such private conversations, known as “ex parte” communications. That effort was greeted with “nearly six months of stonewalling,” she said.

“While this is an important victory for oversight and transparency, government accountability shouldn’t be this hard to secure,” she said.

The ordinance, which also applies to communications between commissioners and elected officials’ staff, is expected to go into effect in about a month. Meanwhile, the 13-member Charter Reform Commission approved its own policy a week ago requiring the disclosure of private conversations between its members and city elected officials.

Some government watchdogs say the disclosures are needed to prevent council members and other city elected officials from seeking to dictate the details of the recommendations that are ultimately issued by the commission. The volunteer citizens panel is currently looking at such ideas as increasing the size of the council and potentially changing the duties of citywide elected officials.

“If the public is going to trust the outcomes of our charter reform process, it has to be transparent and credible,” Commissioner Carla Fuentes, who pushed for the new disclosure policy at its Jan. 21 meeting.

The commission has not yet voted on a proposal to also require disclosure of communications with elected officials’ staff.

It is also looking at the idea of adopting ranked choice voting, where voters list all of the candidates in order of preference, and switching the city to a multi-year budget process.

Councilmember Bob Blumenfield raised warnings about the council’s vote on Tuesday, saying charter reform is substantively different from the 2021 redistricting process. Council members should be engaging in conversations with its volunteer commissioners, to help them better understand how the city is run, Blumenfield said.

Those communications will ensure the commissioners make an informed decision what to recommend for the ballot later this year.

“I don’t want this message to be that it’s somehow bad for council members and the mayor and elected officials to be engaging in this process,” he said. “To the contrary, I think we need to double down our engagement. We need to speak to those commissioners. They need to learn a lot more about how this city really works for this thing to be effective.”

The commission is scheduled to take up the motion to disclose staffer conversations at its next meeting on Feb. 7.

Rob Quan, an organizer with the group Unrig LA, said he doesn’t want to see a repeat of 2021, when members of the citizens commission on redistricting were regularly contacted by council members’ aides. Those ex parte communications were not disclosed, he said.

“If it didn’t apply to staff, we would simply be reinforcing the power of the staff, which have from Day One been the most problematic aspect of this commission,” said Quan, whose group focuses on government oversight.

He and a group of other transparency activists have proposed a total ban on ex parte communication, which hasn’t been considered by the current commission.

Politics

Democrats demand Kristi Noem be fired or warn impeachment will follow

Published

23 hours ago

January 27, 2026

Press Room

Democrats demand Kristi Noem be fired or warn impeachment will follow

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

House Democrats ramped up pressure on Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem on Tuesday, calling for her firing and warning that impeachment proceedings would follow if she remains in office, citing deadly actions by federal agents in Minnesota.

The calls came from both House Democratic leadership and Judiciary Committee Democrats, marking a coordinated escalation from public condemnation to formal impeachment threats.

In a joint statement, House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Democratic Whip Katherine Clark and Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar accused the Trump administration of using federal law enforcement to carry out deadly violence.

“Taxpayer dollars are being weaponized by the Trump administration to kill American citizens, brutalize communities and violently target law-abiding immigrant families,” the leaders said. “The country is disgusted by what the Department of Homeland Security has done.”

NOEM SAYS SHE GRIEVES FOR FAMILY AFTER CBP-RELATED SHOOTING IN MINNEAPOLIS, VOWS THOROUGH INVESTIGATION

House Democrats ramped up pressure on DHS Secretary Kristi Noem on Tuesday. ( Al Drago/Getty Images)

The leaders warned that unless Noem is removed, impeachment proceedings would follow.

“Kristi Noem should be fired immediately, or we will commence impeachment proceedings in the House of Representatives,” the statement said.

“We can do this the easy way or the hard way.”

The demands come as Noem faces widespread criticism after federal agents killed two U.S. citizens in Minnesota this month.

Separately, Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, called on Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, to immediately begin impeachment proceedings if Noem is not fired or forced to resign.

“Unless Secretary Noem resigns or is fired, the Judiciary Committee’s Chairman, Jim Jordan, should immediately commence House Judiciary Committee impeachment proceedings to remove her from office,” Raskin said.

BORDER PATROL COMMANDER GREGORY BOVINO TO LEAVE MINNESOTA, AS TOM HOMAN TAKES OVER

Federal agents try to clear demonstrators near a hotel, using tear gas during a noise demonstration protest in response to federal immigration enforcement operations in Minneapolis. (Adam Gray/AP Photo)

Raskin accused Noem of overseeing what he described as unlawful killings and a subsequent cover-up.

“Far from condemning these unlawful and savage killings in cold blood, Secretary Noem immediately labeled Renée Good and Alex Pretti ‘domestic terrorists,’ blatantly lied about the circumstances of the shootings that took their lives, and attempted to cover up and blockade any legitimate investigation into their deaths,” he said.

Separately, Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., called on Trump to fire Noem directly on Tuesday.

In a post on X, the senator accused Noem of “betraying” the department’s central mission.

In a joint statement with other Democratic leaders, Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., accused the Trump administration of using federal law enforcement to carry out deadly violence. (Roberto Schmidt/Getty Images)

However, President Donald Trump confirmed on Tuesday that he has no plans to ask Noem to step down from her role.

Trump was asked about Noem’s status during a gaggle with reporters outside the White House. He told the press that he still thinks Noem is doing a “great job.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“Is Kristi Noem going to step down?” a reporter asked.

“No,” Trump responded bluntly.

He later said he believes she is doing a “very good job,” citing her role in closing down the border.

Fox News’ Anders Hagstrom contributed to this report.

Michael Dorgan is a writer for Fox News Digital and Fox Business.

You can send tips to michael.dorgan@fox.com and follow him on Twitter @M_Dorgan.