Meta’s shareholders are asking a Delaware court to punish two of the company’s top executives for deleting crucial emails related to the Cambridge Analytica privacy scandal. This request comes as part of a larger lawsuit accusing Meta’s leaders of failing to protect user privacy and breaking the law. The shareholders claim that these top executives, despite being told to keep records, erased emails that could help their case.
The Controversy Around Email Deletion
The case revolves around a massive privacy scandal involving Facebook, now called Meta, and a political consulting firm called Cambridge Analytica. In 2018, it was revealed that the company sold personal data from millions of Facebook users without their consent, sparking outrage and leading to major fines. Shareholders are now suing Meta’s executives, accusing them of ignoring their duties to protect users’ privacy and of violating a 2012 agreement with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
At the center of this new controversy are two key figures from Meta: Sheryl Sandberg, the company’s former Chief Operating Officer, and Jeff Zients, a current board member who is also the White House chief of staff. According to the shareholders’ lawyers, both Sandberg and Zients destroyed important emails after being told to keep all documents related to the investigation. These emails were sent through their personal mail accounts, which the plaintiffs argue they used to discuss important matters related to the scandal and the lawsuit.
Sandberg and Zients Accused of Breaking the Rules
The plaintiffs’ lawyers claim that Sandberg and Zients ignored official instructions, called a “litigation hold,” which required them to preserve all related documents. They say both executives permanently erased emails that could be crucial to the case. For example, Sandberg deleted her Gmail messages after just 30 days, despite the warning to save her emails. Zients, on the other hand, didn’t turn off an automatic deletion feature in his personal email account, which led to the loss of potentially key communications.
Meta Faces $15 Million Fine Over Facebook User Privacy Violations in South Korea
The shareholders argue that Sandberg and Zients’ actions were either reckless or intentional. They also believe that the executives should be prevented from testifying about any information they might have shared through their personal emails. Furthermore, the plaintiffs are asking the judge to increase the burden of proof for any defense these executives might present. Instead of the usual standard of “preponderance of the evidence,” they want the court to require “clear and convincing evidence,” which would make it harder for the executives to defend themselves.
Defense Lawyers Push Back
Meta’s defense team acknowledges that deleting the emails was “unfortunate,” but they argue that the plaintiffs haven’t shown any harm was done. According to the defense lawyers, there’s no evidence of a “grand scheme” or a deliberate attempt to hide important information. They argue that the majority of the emails sent or received by Sandberg and Zients through their personal accounts were also shared with other people at Meta. Therefore, they suggest, any emails that were deleted are likely available from other sources within the company.
The plaintiffs, however, aren’t buying this defense. They believe Sandberg had full control over which emails were kept and which ones were deleted. In their view, she made a choice to erase the communications, and it wasn’t a mistake. This is why they are asking the court to take strong action, including sanctions, to punish the executives for deleting the emails.
The case has raised serious concerns about whether these high-level executives deliberately tried to cover up important details related to the scandal. If the court decides to impose sanctions, Sandberg and Zients could face significant consequences, including being banned from providing testimony about the erased emails.
