Leftists are taking Meta’s new changes pretty hard. An attorney who represented the company in its AI intellectual property lawsuit announced on Monday that he would no longer be working with Meta due to its “descent into toxic masculinity and Neo-Nazi madness.”
To put it simply, the lawyer doesn’t want to work with a company that does not go overboard to cater to progressive ideologues.
In a post on LinkedIn, attorney Mark Lemley indicated he considered leaving Facebook, owned by Meta, because he finds “great value in the connections and friends I have here, and it doesn’t seem fair that I should lose that because [Meta CEO Mark] Zuckerberg is having a mid-life crisis.”
The lawyer said he decided to remain on the platform but would “engage somewhat less than I normally do.”
However, he did say he would deactivate his account on Threads, also owned by Meta, and would “no longer buy anything from ads I see on Facebook or Instagram.”
The attorney further stated that he had “fired Meta as a client.”
While I think they are on the right side in the generative AI copyright dispute in which I represented them, and I hope they win, I cannot in good conscience serve as their lawyer any longer
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced last week that the company would be implementing several changes to its content moderation policies and internal culture. He stated he planned to do away with its current fact-checking system, which involves biased journalists flagging posts and placing notes on them.
Recommended
Instead, the company will adopt a Community Notes feature similar to Elon Musk’s X, which allows users to fact-check posts regardless of political persuasion.
Zuckerberg has reportedly made some significant changes at the company as it moves away from its tender embrace of progressive orthodoxy. It has scrapped its diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs and even removed tampons from men’s restrooms.
President-elect Donald Trump’s victory in November, as well as the shifting tide, appears to be motivating this change. It’s certainly possible that Zuckerberg may have had an awakening. But there can also be no doubt that he is watching the changing political tides and is making a business decision.
Legal scholar and political commentator Jonathan Turley noted that "Terminating representation can be a tricky business for lawyers, who generally try to protect clients from embarassment or negative implications."
Terminating representation can be a tricky business for lawyers, who generally try to protect clients from embarrassment or negative implications. That is why it was surprising to see Mark Lemley publicly denounce Mark Zuckerberg in a social media tirade. https://t.co/hawAoonwlr
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) January 17, 2025
It is no surprise that someone like Lemley would quit Facebook. There were similar stories after Musk took over X, then known as Twitter. The notion that a social media platform would work to foster dialogue from every political affiliation is anathema to those on the authoritarian left, who enjoyed their decade-long dominance over social media. Now that the platform is no longer going to suppress their opposition, it appears at least some of these people are taking their ball and going home.
Good riddance.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member