From toast of town to toxic: Facebook CEO on outs with Dems

Mark Zuckerberg’s social network in Washington is shrinking.

Bipartisan hostility against Facebook has been building for months, fueled by a series of privacy scandals, site’s role in Russian meddling in 2016 presidential campaign and accusations that Facebook crushes competitors.

w, with 2020 elections approaching, Democrats especially are homing in on conduct of social media giant and its refusal to fact-check political s and remove false ones.

“When you’re . 1 mopoly, people are going to come after you,” says John Feehery, a veteran Republican communications strategist. challenge for Democrats, as he sees it: “y’re facing a base that is very angry and restive. So y have to be much more aggressive in taking on corporations.”

Zuckerberg enjoyed a cozy relationship with Obama ministration. But in face of growing public outr, co-founder of upstart born under motto “Move fast and break things” is learning art of smoothing over and piecing back toger.

His new strategy: a personal blitz featuring serial private meetings in Washington with key lawmakers of both parties and President Donald Trump; small, off--record dinners at his California home with conservative journalists and opinion makers; and occasional public dress or TV interview.

He’s become lobbyist-in-chief for a tech giant that has about 60 people officially playing that role. company spent an estimated $12.6 million on federal influencing last year.

political issue hits close to home for Democrats. Facebook, as well as Twitter and Google, refused in September to remove a misleing video from Trump’s reelection campaign that targeted top-tier Democratic candidate Joe Biden. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, ar top Democratic contender, chose to hit back by running her own and making it personal by falsely claiming that Zuckerberg h endorsed Trump for 2020.

Warren, who has called for breaking up Facebook and or tech giants, ackwledged ’s deliberate falsity to make her point.

n came Zuckerberg’s speech last month at Georgetown University in which he promoted free expression as foundation for Facebook’s refusal to take down content it deems newsworthy, even if material violates company standards. next week, during prickly questioning by Democratic lawmakers at a televised House hearing, Zuckerberg dug in on t fact-checking politicians’ speech and handling of hate speech and potential incitements to violence.

“This really is t about money,” Zuckerberg insisted. “It is important that people can see for mselves what politicians are saying.” Facebook says political vertising accounts for less than half of 1% of its total revenue.

In lambasting from Democrats, Rep. Joyce Beatty of Ohio, vice chair of Congressional Black Caucus, focused on Facebook’s track record on civil rights and diversity. She told Zuckerberg that he h “ruined lives of many people, discriminated against m.”

As part of a legal settlement with civil rights groups, Facebook changed its -targeting systems this year to prevent discrimination in housing, credit and employment s. It h previously allowed such s to be targeted to people based on , sex or race, which is illegal.

At some points, friendlier Republican members of House Financial Services Committee asked Zuckerberg how he was holding up through six-hour hearing. “I’m doing OK,” replied 35-year-old co-founder, chairman and CEO. He’s one of world’s richest individuals, with a net worth currently estimated at $71 billion.

Summing up, Rep. Maxine Waters, California Democrat who les committee, told Zuckerberg, “You have opened up a discussion about wher Facebook should be broken up.”

A mandated breakup would be worst-case scenario for Facebook and or big tech companies. Facebook says splitting up large tech corporations would make election system more vulnerable to interference because companies wouldn’t be able to work toger to prevent it.

For Zuckerberg and Democrats, “it may be a nasty divorce,” said James Thurber, a professor of government at American University who founded its Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies. “He clearly has taken a stand that’s really quite unpopular.”

Thurber called Zuckerberg’s backst celebrity approach to lobbying efforts “very dangerous.” ″You’ve got to be very careful about that, if you think you can do it yourself,” he said.

Rep. David Cicilline, a senior House Democrat who les Judiciary Committee’s investigation into market dominance of big tech companies, is working on legislation that may target profits me by Facebook from political s it kws are false. measure likely would also apply to social media rivals Twitter and Google.

On Thursday, Twitter me unexpected anuncement that it will ban all political vertising from its service.

“This is a good first step,” Cicilline tweeted. “Your move, Google/Facebook.”

Zuckerberg’s quick riposte, during Facebook’s quarterly conference call on earnings , was to reaffirm company’s commitment to value of free speech, including for politicians.

It’s a sharp reversal of fortune for Facebook from days of Obama ministration, when company was hailed as an exemplar of invation and an engine of ecomic growth. Campaign money flowed to Democrats from big tech companies.

At an employees’ town hall at Facebook’s Silicon Valley hequarters in April 2011, President Barack Obama said: “My name is Barack Obama and I’m guy that got Mark to wear a jacket and tie.”

As y removed jackets and ties in unison and rolled up ir shirt sleeves, Obama enthused, “Being here at Facebook is so exciting for me. You guys are at cutting edge of what’s happening.”