Meta weighed covert push to disavow critic
Meta discussed ‘whisper strategy’ against social media critic Jonathan Haidt, files show
Saturday, 31 October 2026
Photo by Eric Prouzet on Unsplash
Warm-up
- How should companies respond to strong public criticism?
- What makes a source seem credible to you online?
- When can regulation be helpful or harmful?
Vocabulary
- undermine
- to weaken someone’s position or reputation
- disavow
- to say you do not support or accept something
- minutes
- the written record of what was said in a meeting
- internal
- within an organisation, not public
- litigation
- the process of taking legal action in court
- advocate
- a person who publicly supports an idea or policy
- regulation
- an official rule made by authorities
- credible
- able to be believed; trustworthy
Reading
Listen to this story
British EnglishMeta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, discussed an internal “whisper strategy” to undermine the US social psychologist Jonathan Haidt, according to court filings. Minutes labelled “Well-being Meeting Sound-check Notes” describe ideas to “turn other academics against Haidt” and to get the academic community to “disavow Haidt”, including “debunking” his work. The notes also include a goal to “enrage” other scholars “so the media finds him not credible”. A note from 8 March 2023 mentions then research vice-president Curtiss Cobb and calls for a “below-the-line campaign”. It also floats asking someone called “Gellman” to write a “takedown piece”.
Haidt, author of The Anxious Generation (2024), argues that heavy smartphone use has harmed young people’s mental health and has become a prominent advocate for stricter regulation, such as under-16 social media bans. Australia adopted such a ban, and UK officials invited him to brief them on a possible ban. Andrew Gelman, a Columbia professor who has criticised Haidt, wrote that he was not hired by Meta. It is unclear whether Meta acted on the ideas. The documents surfaced in US litigation brought by school districts. Meta was approached for comment.
Comprehension
- What tactic did Meta staff discuss using against Jonathan Haidt?
- Which internal document recorded the ideas about Haidt?
- What policies has Haidt publicly supported regarding young people?
- Who denied being hired by Meta to attack Haidt’s work?
- How did the documents become public, according to the report?
Grammar focus
Three-word phrasal-prepositional verbs
Form: verb + particle + preposition (e.g. come up against, put up with). These are fixed and inseparable: the object comes after the whole phrase. Choose the correct particle–preposition pair. (Examples constructed.)
- Officials came up against fierce criticism from parents.
- Many academics refuse to go along with quiet smear campaigns.
Grammar exercise
Circle the correct option in each sentence.
- Academics won't (put up with it / put it up with).
- Analysts should (face it up to / face up to it).
- Campaigners will (stand them up for / stand up for them).
- No one should (get it away with / get away with it).
- Reporters didn't (look forward to it / look it forward to).
Discussion
- When is it acceptable for a company to push back against critics?
- Do you find Haidt’s concerns about smartphones persuasive? Why or why not?
- What makes academic debate credible in the public eye?
- Should governments ban social media for under-16s? Why or why not?
Vocabulary, reading, and exercises with instant feedback
Spotted a mistake in this lesson? Tell us.