Technology

The executive that helped build Meta’s ad machine is trying to expose it

Published

4 weeks ago

February 19, 2026

The executive that helped build Meta’s ad machine is trying to expose it

Brian Boland spent more than a decade figuring out how to build a system that would make Meta money. On Thursday, he told a California jury it incentivized drawing more and more users, including teens, onto Facebook and Instagram — despite the risks.

Boland’s testimony came a day after Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg took the stand in a case over whether Meta and YouTube are liable for allegedly harming a young woman’s mental health. Zuckerberg framed Meta’s mission as balancing safety with free expression, not revenue. Boland’s role was to counter this by explaining how Meta makes money, and how that shaped its platforms’ design. Boland testified that Zuckerberg fostered a culture that prioritized growth and profit over users’ wellbeing from the top down. He said he’s been described as a whistleblower — a term Meta has broadly sought to limit for fear it would prejudice the jury, but which the judge has generally allowed. Over his 11 years at Meta, Boland said he went from having “deep blind faith” in the company to coming to the “firm belief that competition and power and growth were the things that Mark Zuckerberg cared about most.”

Boland last served as Meta’s VP of partnerships before leaving in 2020, working to bring content to the platform that it could monetize, and previously worked in a variety of advertising roles beginning in 2009. He testified that Facebook’s infamous early slogan of “move fast and break things” represented “a cultural ethos at the company.” He said the idea behind the motto was generally, “don’t really think about what could go wrong with a product, but just get it out there and learn and see.” At the height of its prominence internally, employees would sit down at their desks to see a piece of paper that said, “what will you break today?” Boland testified.

“The priorities were on winning growth and engagement”

Zuckerberg consistently made his priorities for the company abundantly clear, according to Boland. He’d announce them in all hands meetings and leave no shadow of a doubt what the company should be focused on, whether it was building its products to be mobile-first, or getting ahead of the competition. When Zuckerberg realized that then-Facebook had to get into shape to compete with a rumored Google social network competitor (which he didn’t name, but seemed to refer to Google+), Boland recalled a digital countdown clock in the office that symbolized how much time they had left to achieve their goals during what the company called a “lockdown.” During his time at the company, Boland testified, there was never a lockdown around user safety, and Zuckerberg allegedly instilled in engineers that “the priorities were on winning growth and engagement.”

Meta has repeatedly denied that it tries to maximize users’ engagement on its platforms over safeguarding their wellbeing. In the past weeks, both Zuckerberg and Instagram CEO Adam Mosseri testified that building platforms that users enjoy and feel good on is in their long-term interest, and that’s what drives their decisions.

Boland disputes this. “My experience was that when there were opportunities to really try to understand what the products might be doing harmfully in the world, that those were not the priority,” he testified. “Those were more of a problem than an opportunity to fix.”

When safety issues came up through press reports or regulatory questions, Boland said, “the primary response was to figure out how to manage through the press cycle, to what the media was saying, as opposed to saying, ‘let’s take a step back and really deeply understand.” Though Boland said he told his advertising-focused team that they should be the ones to discover “broken parts,” rather than those outside the company, he said that philosophy didn’t extend to the rest of the company.

On the stand the day before, Zuckerberg pointed to documents around 2019 showing disagreement among his employees with his decisions, saying they demonstrated a culture that encourages a diversity of opinion. Boland, however, testified that while that might have been the case earlier in his tenure, it later became “a very closed down culture.”

“There’s not a moral algorithm, that’s not a thing … Doesn’t eat, doesn’t sleep, doesn’t care”

Since the jury can only consider decisions and products that Meta itself made, rather than content it hosted from users, lead plaintiff attorney Mark Lanier also had Boland describe how Meta’s algorithm works, and the decisions that went into making and testing it. Algorithms have an “immense amount of power,” Boland said, and are “absolutely relentless” in pursuing their programmed goals — in many cases at Meta, that was allegedly engagement. “There’s not a moral algorithm, that’s not a thing,” Boland said. “Doesn’t eat, doesn’t sleep, doesn’t care.”

During his testimony on Wednesday, Zuckerberg commented that Boland “developed some strong political opinions” toward the end of his time at the company. (Neither Zuckerberg nor Boland offered specifics, but in a 2025 blog post, Boland indicated he was deleting his Facebook account in part over disagreements with how Meta handled events like January 6th, writing that he believed “Facebook had contributed to spreading ‘Stop the Steal’ propaganda and enabling this attempted coup.”) Lanier spent time establishing that Boland was respected by peers, showing a CNBC article about his departure that quoted a glowing statement from his then-boss, and a reference to an unnamed source who reportedly described Boland as someone with a strong moral character.

On cross examination, Meta attorney Phyllis Jones clarified that Boland didn’t work on the teams tasked with understanding youth safety at the company. Boland agreed that advertising business models are not inherently bad, and neither are algorithms. He also admitted that many of his concerns involved the content users were posting, which is not relevant to the current case.

During his direct examination, Lanier asked if Boland had ever expressed his concerns to Zuckerberg directly. Boland said he’d told the CEO he’d seen concerning data showing “harmful outcomes” of the company’s algorithms and suggested that they investigate further. He recalled Zuckerberg responding something to the effect of, “I hope there’s still things you’re proud of.” Soon after, he said, he quit.

Boland said he left upwards of $10 million worth of unvested Meta stock on the table when he departed, though he admitted he made more than that over the years. He said he still finds it “nerve-wracking” every time he speaks out about the company. “This is an incredibly powerful company,” he said.

Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.

Lauren Feiner

Related Topics:law Meta policy Report Social Media Tech

Click to comment

Technology

A rogue AI led to a serious security incident at Meta

Published

3 hours ago

March 19, 2026

Press Room

A rogue AI led to a serious security incident at Meta

For almost two hours last week, Meta employees had unauthorized access to company and user data thanks to an AI agent that gave an employee inaccurate technical advice, as previously reported by The Information. Meta spokesperson Tracy Clayton said in a statement to The Verge that “no user data was mishandled” during the incident.

A Meta engineer was using an internal AI agent, which Clayton described as “similar in nature to OpenClaw within a secure development environment,” to analyze a technical question another employee posted on an internal company forum. But the agent also independently publicly replied to the question after analyzing it, without getting approval first. The reply was only meant to be shown to the employee who requested it, not posted publicly.

An employee then acted on the AI’s advice, which “provided inaccurate information” that led to a “SEV1” level security incident, the second-highest severity rating Meta uses. The incident temporarily allowed employees to access sensitive data they were not authorized to view, but the issue has since been resolved.

According to Clayton, the AI agent involved didn’t take any technical action itself, beyond posting inaccurate technical advice, something a human could have also done. A human, however, might have done further testing and made a more complete judgment call before sharing the information — and it’s not clear whether the employee who originally prompted the answer planned to post it publicly.

“The employee interacting with the system was fully aware that they were communicating with an automated bot. This was indicated by a disclaimer noted in the footer and by the employee’s own reply on that thread,” Clayton commented to The Verge. “The agent took no action aside from providing a response to a question. Had the engineer that acted on that known better, or did other checks, this would have been avoided.”

Last month, an AI agent from open source platform OpenClaw went more directly rogue at Meta when an employee asked it to sort through emails in her inbox, deleting emails without permission. The whole idea behind agents like OpenClaw is that they can take action on their own, but like any other AI model, they don’t always interpret prompts and instructions correctly or give accurate responses, a fact Meta employees have now discovered twice.

Technology

Phishing scam exploits Apple Mail ‘trusted sender’ label

Published

4 hours ago

March 19, 2026

Press Room

Phishing scam exploits Apple Mail ‘trusted sender’ label

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Phishing emails are getting more convincing every day. Scammers copy the look of trusted brands and rely on urgency to get you to click before you think. But sometimes the most misleading part of a scam is not the email itself. It is the signal your own email app gives you.

A CyberGuy reader recently sent us a screenshot of an email that looked suspicious but included something surprising at the top. Apple Mail displayed a banner that said, “This message was sent from a trusted sender.” At first glance, that message feels reassuring. Many people would assume the email must be legitimate. The reader sent the screenshot with the subject line “Another sneaky trick.” In the image, Apple Mail labels the message as coming from a trusted sender even though the email itself shows several signs of a phishing scam.

Here is the catch. That label comes from Apple Mail itself, not from Apple and not from a system verifying the email. In other words, a phishing email can still appear trusted. Understanding how this happens can help you avoid handing your Apple ID or other personal information to scammers.

APPLE APP PASSWORD SCAM EMAIL WARNING

Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report
Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox. Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide – free when you join my CYBERGUY.COM newsletter.

Scammers often copy Apple’s branding and use urgent warnings to push people into clicking malicious links. (Photo Illustration by Thomas Trutschel/Photothek via Getty Images)

Why Apple Mail may label a phishing email as a trusted sender

Apple Mail automatically adds the trusted sender banner in certain situations. It usually appears when the email address looks familiar to your device. For example, Apple Mail may display the banner if:

The sender’s address is saved in your Contacts
You have replied to that email address before
The address appears in previous email conversations

The feature is designed to help you quickly recognize people you communicate with often. It is meant as a convenience signal, not a security verification. That distinction is important.

Warning signs of a fake Apple account email

Phishing emails often copy the look of real Apple notifications. The goal is to create urgency so the victim clicks before thinking. The email in the screenshot contains several classic warning signs.

Generic greeting

The message begins with “Dear user” instead of addressing the recipient by name. Legitimate account emails typically reference your name or Apple ID information.

Slightly incorrect branding

The email references “Cloud+ subscription.” Apple’s real service is called iCloud+. Small branding mistakes often appear in phishing campaigns.

Urgent scare tactics

The message warns that personal data could be permanently removed from cloud storage. Fear and urgency are common tools in phishing scams.

Payment problems tied to account threats

Scammers often claim a subscription payment failed and your account is at risk. The goal is to push victims to click a link and enter login details. Apple does not send emails threatening immediate deletion of iCloud data because of a billing issue.

Why the Apple Mail trusted sender banner can be misleading

Because the banner relies on familiarity, scammers can sometimes exploit it. Cybercriminals often spoof real email addresses so their messages appear to come from someone you know. If that address matches a contact or previous message history, Apple Mail may still mark it as trusted.

REAL APPLE SUPPORT EMAILS USED IN NEW PHISHING SCAM

That can create a false sense of safety. The banner simply reflects your email history. It does not confirm the sender’s identity or verify that the message actually came from Apple or any legitimate company. In some cases, that visual signal can make a phishing email look more believable than it really is.

The “trusted sender” banner in Apple Mail reflects your contact history. It does not verify that the email actually came from Apple or another legitimate company. (Sean Gallup/Getty Images)

Ways to stay safe from Apple phishing emails

Phishing emails continue to evolve, but a few simple habits can greatly reduce your risk.

1) Avoid clicking links in account warning emails

If you receive a notice about your Apple account, open your browser and go directly to Apple’s official website instead of using the email link.

2) Use strong antivirus software

Strong antivirus software can help detect malicious links, suspicious downloads, and phishing pages before they reach your device. Get my picks for the best 2026 antivirus protection winners for your Windows, Mac, Android & iOS devices at Cyberguy.com

3) Use a data removal service

Scammers often gather personal information from data broker websites to make phishing emails look more convincing. Removing your data from these sites reduces the information criminals can use to target you. Check out my top picks for data removal services and get a free scan to find out if your personal information is already out on the web by visiting Cyberguy.com.

4) Check your Apple account settings directly

You can verify subscriptions by opening Settings on your device, tapping your Apple ID and selecting Subscriptions.

5) Look closely at branding and wording

Misspelled product names, unusual formatting, and generic greetings often reveal a phishing email.

6) Enable two-factor authentication

Two-factor authentication (2FA) adds another layer of protection, even if someone manages to steal your password.

Cybercriminals frequently disguise their emails by mimicking legitimate addresses, making it look like the message was sent by someone you trust. (Wei Leng Tay/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Kurt’s key takeaways

Email apps often try to help by identifying messages that appear familiar. Unfortunately, scammers understand how those systems work. The trusted sender banner in Apple Mail reflects your contact history. It does not confirm that the message came from Apple or any legitimate company. That means one simple habit still offers the best protection. Pause before clicking any urgent account warning. Because in the world of phishing scams, the messages that look the most convincing are often the most dangerous.

If your email app told you a message was trusted, would you still double-check before clicking? Let us know by writing to us at Cyberguy.com.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson is an award-winning tech journalist who has a deep love of technology, gear and gadgets that make life better with his contributions for Fox News & FOX Business beginning mornings on “FOX & Friends.” Got a tech question? Get Kurt’s free CyberGuy Newsletter, share your voice, a story idea or comment at CyberGuy.com.

Technology

The FBI is buying Americans’ location data

Published

15 hours ago

March 19, 2026

Press Room

The FBI is buying Americans’ location data

Senate Intelligence Committee Hears Testimony From Top Officials On Worldwide Threats

WASHINGTON, DC – MARCH 18: Federal Bureau of Investigation Director Kash Patel testifies during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on worldwide threats in the Hart Senate Office Building on March 18, 2026 in Washington, DC. A closed session immediately followed the hearing. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

Getty Images