Tech-battery.com| Wholesale Phone,Tablet,Camera ,Tool ,Laptop Battery, Adapter and Accessories store in US

Last week’s testimony from Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen was devastating.

The documents she took from the company were carefully and methodically explained – a window into the inner workings of Facebook. It was a stunning moment of theatre – her testimony reverberating around the world.

But last week could be significant for the future of whistleblowing in Silicon Valley for another reason.

On Thursday night Gavin Newsom, California’s governor, signed into law the Silenced No More Act.

Sweeping changes
The legislation has been pushed by Ifeoma Ozoma – a whistleblower who used to work at Pinterest.

She came forward with accusations of racism against the company in June last year – allegations on which Pinterest told the BBC it did not wish to comment.

In doing so, she realised that the law was strangely skewed.

It is no secret that Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) can be used in the US to silence employees. It was something that came up time and time again during the #MeToo revelations.

Legislators in California responded by bringing in a law that protected whistleblowers in sexual harassment cases.

But Ms Ozoma realised that the law didn’t protect other forms of alleged discrimination – like racism. Since then she’s been fighting to change the law.

And on Thursday, she did just that.

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
View original tweet on Twitter
“The act allows anyone in California, regardless of the language in an NDA… to speak about their experiences with discrimination, harassment, or any other unlawful conduct,” Ms Ozoma says.

That is a big change to state law in California. Overnight, legal agreements that look to prevent employees coming forward have been severely restricted.

“It’s wonderful,” she tells me.

‘The CIA playbook’
Silicon Valley has traditionally been a terrible place for whistleblowers.

Last month I spoke to Cori Crider, from Foxglove, a group that helps whistleblowers come forward.

She said something that shocked me.

“I spent more than a decade working in national security and I very often feel like Silicon Valley types play from the playbook of the CIA on this stuff,” she said.

Being a whistleblower anywhere is difficult. But when it comes to tech, it can be particularly so.

“Think of the surveillance capabilities that these companies have… you have to assume that they have access to every single thing that you’re doing,” Ms Ozoma says.

Silicon Valley is a paranoid place – and with good reason. Intellectual property and proprietary technology is where much of the value of a company comes from. You don’t want your employees running off to another company with your trade secrets.

Tech companies, though, have been accused of secrecy mission creep – using tightly worded agreements to stop employees from raising legitimate concerns.

Is another storm brewing in Silicon Valley?
Sexual harassment claims ‘should not be silenced’
Cher Scarlett is a software engineer at Apple. Last month she made a complaint against the company to the US National Labor Relations Board.

She alleges that the company suppressed attempts by workers to organise.

In her filings, she alleges that Apple repeatedly blocked employee efforts to survey and discuss pay – something on which the tech giant has not commented.

Ms Scarlett was uncertain whether she could raise her concerns publicly, or of the legal implications in the documents she signed when she started the job.

“You know, for anybody who’s not a lawyer, it’s scary… I don’t have the expertise to understand the legal jargon,” she says.

“It’s very, very heavy, and you end up with a lot of scrutiny, and hostility.”

The public eye
Timnit Gebru says she was fired from Google in December last year. She has accused the company of institutional racism and supressing research.

Google has apologised for the circumstances under which she left the company.

Ms Gebru says that taking on a corporation with unlimited resources is frightening.

“The cost, it’s no joke,” she says. “Lawyers cost a lot and you don’t even know if it’s worth it.”

And then there’s the publicity. When Ms Gebru made the claims, she was was suddenly catapulted into the international limelight. Her phone rang off the hook.

“I didn’t have any time to process any of it, emotionally, no time at all. I was just constantly on the phone, to [other] employees and talking to the press.

“I knew it was very important for my story to come out before Google’s,” she says.

Being a whistleblower can be daunting, and it helps to have financial backing.

Elizabeth Holmes is currently standing trial in San Jose for fraud.

The company she founded and ran, Theranos, claimed to be able to diagnose hundreds of diseases through a few drops of blood.

It couldn’t.

Tyler Shultz, who worked at the company, was crucial in exposing the scandal. He was brave and courageous. But he is also the grandson of former Secretary of State George Shultz, and could afford lawyers when Ms Holmes tried to intimidate him with threatening letters.

Ms Haugen’s testimony may be inspiring to many, but the international scrutiny she received – the blunt pushback from Facebook – may intimidate others.

And then there’s the age old problem that whistleblowers have – the fear that if they speak out they’ll become unemployable.

“I think a lot of people are worried that they’re not going to be able to find another job after they come forward,” Ms Scarlett says.

This all helps to explain why the media gets so excited by people like Ms Haugen. She isn’t the first, but it is rare when people come forward.

“It’s a deeply personal decision that is based on people’s personal situations, and their circumstances,” Ms Ozoma says.

She has written a handbook for whistleblowers to help them understand how the process might pan out, what to expect and how to prepare.

She hopes it will assist employees who are thinking about taking the plunge.

Yet despite the change in the law in California, Ms Ozoma still believes the system is stacked against coming forward. And until that changes, scenes like last week’s senate hearing will be the exception.

Google says it will stop ads running on climate change-denying YouTube videos and other content, and prohibit ads promoting these claims.

The company says it is responding to concerns from advertisers.

The ban will cover ads for – and the monetization of – content that contradicts the “scientific consensus around the existence and causes of climate change”.

It will be enforced by “automated tools and human review”.

The policy will apply to content “referring to climate change as a hoax or a scam, claims denying that long-term trends show the global climate is warming, and claims denying that greenhouse gas emissions or human activity contribute to climate change”.

Misinformation money
The changes mean YouTube creators will be stopped from earning advertising revenue from content which denies climate change.

A 2020 report by Avaaz – a US not-for-profit organisation which promotes activism on issues such as climate change – accused YouTube of “incentivizing this climate misinformation content via its monetization program”.

Fadi Quran, who runs Avaaz’s disinformation project, told the BBC it “could turn the tide on the climate denial economy”.

“With three weeks left for the critical Glasgow summit, and climate misinformation on the rise to undermine it, other social media platforms must quickly follow Google’s leadership.”

This move from Google marks a first step in trying to disincentivize those looking to profit from denying and downplaying the very real threat of climate change, on social media.

Creating emotive content that’s wrong about climate change attracts views, likes, and therefore money through advertising. This new policy aims to put an end to that last part – on Google platforms at least.

But critics are calling for social media sites to tackle climate change disinformation in the same way – and with the same seriousness – as falsehoods about the pandemic.

That would include introducing labels for false information – and demoting videos and content which mislead about climate change from the sites’ algorithms – so that they aren’t suggested to users.

The human cost of anti-vaccine and coronavirus conspiracies appears to be in part what eventually inspired the social media sites to act.

The human cost of climate change has become clear over recent months – and the question remains: will social media sites act decisively and quickly enough to combat harmful lies that could hinder efforts to save the planet?

2px presentational grey line
Greenpeace’s Silvia Pastorelli welcomed the announcement, but told the BBC it was “nowhere near enough to stop the overwhelming amount of climate disinformation, greenwashing and outright climate denial on big tech’s platforms”.

Stopping the monetization of content does not remove it or reduce its prominence. But Google says it does both, and strives to provide authoritative information, even when people search for climate-related conspiracies.

The announcement by Google’s advertising team follows a blog post on Wednesday by Google Chief Executive Sundar Pichai, in which he announced a range of measures to help tackle climate change including:

In the US, Google Maps will display the most fuel-efficient route if it isn’t already the fastest one.
Adding carbon emissions information to Google Flights, including emissions per seat.
A new feature for Nest thermostats, helping users maximise clean energy use.

Phone-maker Samsung has apologised for a software update sent to UK customers stating Russian government-mandated apps had been downloaded.

It blamed a technical error for the incorrect wording and said no Russian apps had been installed.

A new law in Russia that demands smartphones offer software from the country came into effect in April.

One expert said that Samsung had not fully explained what went wrong and that customers would be concerned.

Andrew Edmans bought a second-hand Samsung Galaxy Z Fold2 phone from Amazon Marketplace three weeks ago, and ran an official Samsung update.

After the installation had completed, he noticed the wording which read: “As part of the implementation of the requirements of the decree of the government of the Russian Federation No 1867 of 18/11/2020, the download of mandatory applications has been added. Some of these apps will only be installed if the device is reset to factory settings.”

Concerned, he contacted Samsung who promised a reply within 48 hours.

He got nothing and called again four days later.

“Finally a tech remote-accessed my phone and confirmed the update, and stated he’d never seen it before and referred me to customer solutions.”

This was escalated to head office and Mr Edmans was eventually told it was “a notification error”.

Samsung told the BBC: “We can confirm that the wording of the message was incorrect and shared with a limited number of UK customers due to a technical error.

“The upgrade received was UK-specific and no third-party apps from Russian have been installed on devices, or have access to the device itself

“We sincerely apologise for any inconvenience caused by this.”

Mr Edmans said that he was “disappointed” with the way Samsung had handled the issue.

“All I know is, as of this morning, my Samsung Fold 2 device still states it has a Russian Federation update on it,” he said.

“I suffer from bipolar and anxiety disorders and this concern over security on my phone has only compounded those issues.”

Russian restrictions

Prof Alan Woodward, a computer security expert at University of Surrey, said that it was hard to understand what technical error could have caused such a message to be sent by mistake.

But, he added, it offered an insight into how Samsung was dealing with the Russian law.

“The good thing about this warning – assuming it is meant for you – is that Samsung is being transparent by giving you links to the Russian Federation decree that mandates such software.”

But privacy expert Pat Walshe said he thought the issue had been badly handled by Samsung.

“I do not believe that Samsung handled this matter appropriately, or considered the anxiety and distress this caused Mr Edmans, and the fact that he could not trust the install.

“How many customers received the notice? How did the error occur? How can individuals be confident that erroneous software was not installed on their device?”

Russia has tightened its rules on the internet in recent years, including requiring search engines to delete some results and calling on messaging services to share encryption keys. ISPs are required to install network equipment that can filter content.

It has also tested an unplugged version of the internet, which would give the Kremlin the ability to switch off connections to the worldwide web if it felt the country was under threat.

The law requiring smartphones, computers and smart televisions sold in the country to have Russian alternatives to their normal software installed became effective in April 2021.

It was designed to help Russian software firms promote their smartphones, although some have raised concerns that the Russian-made software could be used to spy on users.

Samsung agreed to pre-install these apps but rival Apple did not – instead it offers users the option to install the Russian alternatives, which is not compulsory.

Initially it had refused to comply at all but, after pressure from Moscow, agreed to that compromise.

British broadcaster Sky is launching a TV that streams content via the internet, removing the need for a satellite dish.

The company describes Sky Glass as a “no-fuss” streaming TV.

One expert said it would put the broadcaster in direct competition with TV makers such as Samsung and Sony.

Another said while ditching the “outdated satellite dish” was long overdue, it was “an expensive way to watch TV”.

Sky Glass eliminates the need for an external box – and with built-in Dolby Atmos, there is no need for a sound bar either.

Other specs include:

three versions – 43in, 55in and 65in
a single wire and just one plug
4K ultra-high-definition quantum-dot screen
10-bit high dynamic range to support Dolby Vision HDR
voice-activated interface
available in five colours
“Sky Glass is the streaming TV with Sky inside, providing the total integration of hardware, software and content,” group chief executive Dana Strong said.

“We believe this is the smartest TV available.”

Although it will require a Sky subscription, content from BBC iPlayer, Amazon, Netflix, Disney+, ITV Hub and All4 will also be available.

Sky has not yet named the hardware partner who will make the device.

It has also not explained how exactly it plans to stream its content over the web, without delays or buffering.

If someone wishes to cancel their Sky subscription after purchasing the TV, they will still be able to use the TV but will lose some of the more advanced features, such as voice control and playlists.

‘Extremely lucrative’
While the move to deliver content over the internet rather than via satellite would bring “its own challenges”, Sky’s decision made a lot of business sense, independent technology analyst Paolo Pescatore said.

“By not having a satellite dish, you lower costs and increase margins,” he said.

“Providing your own TV set and persuading people to sign up for a subscription, that is extremely lucrative for Sky.”

In future, Sky may offer discounts on the TV with its broadband offerings too, he said.

Sky already offers TV via broadband in Italy, and Germany, via its Sky Q set-top box.

This bolder move into hardware would also put it in direct competition with TV-makers such as Samsung and Sony, who bundle Sky content with their devices, Mr Pescatore said, and hasten “the demise of the set-top box”.

The TV can either be paid for as part of an existing subscription or bought outright.

Users who already have a £26 Sky Ultimate TV subscription will pay £13 extra per month for the smallest TV. The 55in screen will be £17 and the 65in £21.

Buying the smallest version of the TV upfront will cost £649 and will need an additional subscription to Sky. The larger versions will be £849 and £1,049 respectively.

Magic dust
That made it “an expensive way to watch TV,” Ernest Doku, of Uswitch, said.

But he added the market was due a shake-up.

“It’s about time that Sky sprinkled some magic dust over the outdated satellite dish,” Mr Doku said.

“This all-in-one solution finally does away with the set-top box and dish, which historically have put off many potential customers.”

Sky also claimed the Glass would be the world’s first carbon-neutral TV.

Mr Doku said details about how it would achieve that “were thin on the ground” but added: “Encouraging consumers to get rid of working televisions in order to get Sky’s version could generate a lot of unnecessary electronic waste.”

The TV is available from 18 October in the UK, and in other markets next year.

Amazon is expanding its presence on the High Street by opening its first non-food store in the UK.

The shop, in the Bluewater shopping mall near Dartford, will sell around 2,000 of its most popular and best-rated products.

It’s called Amazon 4-star, because every item has been given more than four stars by customers.

However, one retail expert said the shop could be “muddled and uninspiring”.

This will be the first Amazon 4-star store outside the US, where there are already more than 30 outlets.

The range of products, which takes in books, consumer electronics, toys, games and homeware, reflects what Amazon customers are buying online.

Amazon pays £492m in UK tax as sales surge to £20.6bn
Macy’s sues to stop Amazon using famous New York billboard
Amazon ‘planning to open department stores in US’
There’s a “Most Wished For” section, for instance, showing the most popular products from customers’ wish lists.

Digital price tags are used to ensure the prices are the same in-store and online. Shoppers don’t need to have an Amazon account to use it.

And customers will also be able to collect items ordered online as well as return items without the need for packaging and labels.

Andy Jones, director of Amazon 4-star UK, declined to say how many more stores he plans to open in the UK.

Amazon effect
This global giant is often accused of killing the High Street by undercutting traditional retailers and paying less tax.

Now it’s moving onto their physical patch as well.

However, retail expert Natalie Berg said the Amazon move “is purely about experimentation”.

The giant’s aim, she said, is to encourage more online shopping.

“This is not about shifting more product; it’s about baiting shoppers into Amazon’s ecosystem,” Ms Berg said.

“It’s about getting shoppers to engage with Amazon’s devices, reminding Prime customers of the value in their memberships, and offering additional choice when it comes to collection and returns of online orders.”

Amazon has already opened six grocery convenience stores in the UK with checkout-free technology.

But Ms Berg said the jury is still out as to whether the world’s most disruptive retailer can do one of the most fundamental retail tasks – run stores.

“The 4-star concept has the potential to be a bit muddled and uninspiring,” she said.

“The store features a smorgasbord of products, the result of Amazon’s very scientific, data-led approach to physical retail.

“But when you strip out the high-tech touches, I struggle to see how it differentiates from any other retailer,” says Ms Berg.

Landlords, though, may welcome the move as they try to find new players to take on empty shops, driven largely by our shopping habits moving online.

The methods Amazon and other employers use to monitor, reward and discipline warehouse workers are being shaken up in California.

State governor Gavin Newsom has signed a bill prohibiting the workers from being fired for failing to meet a quota that does not allow for rest breaks.

Amazon workers have complained of having to work gruelling hours, with harsh penalties for being “off task”.

The online retailer has not commented on the new law.

Bathroom facilities
The bill, the first of its kind, comes into force in January 2022.

Companies will have to detail the number of tasks they expect warehouse workers to complete within a certain timeframe and any penalties for failing to do so.

“An employee shall not be required to meet a quota that prevents compliance with meal or rest periods, use of bathroom facilities, or occupational health and safety laws,” the bill says.

Amazon has about 150,000 employees in California.

‘Arduous workloads’
Its pay and benefits are considered generous for the industry.

But some complain conditions are not and arduous workloads create mental and physical problems.

One of its most controversial policies is time off task (TOT).

Amazon’s algorithms calculate which hours of a shift are off task, based on the number of items scanned, with penalties for those who underperform.

Previously, the system had sent an alert if workers were off task for half an hour.

But in June, Amazon tweaked its policy to average scanned items over a longer period.

At the time of the change, worldwide operations vice-president Dave Clark blogged the tool “could be easily misunderstood” but was primarily to “understand whether there are issues with the tools that people use to be productive” and only secondarily to identify underperforming employees.

One of the biggest criticisms of Amazon is its use of technology, including a large number of robots, dehumanises workers.

It uses an array of technology to keep an eye on workers, including cameras in delivery vans and an app that monitors driving.

‘Union-busting tactics’
In April, workers in Bessemer, Alabama, voted for the first time on whether they wanted to be represented by the National Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union (RWDSU).

The vote went against the union but amid allegations Amazon had used union-busting tactics, including:

altering a traffic-light system outside the warehouse to give union officials less time to leaflet workers
bombarding workers with texts, posters and signs encouraging them to vote no
The National Labour Relations Board found enough evidence Amazon had interfered with the process to warrant a second vote, yet to be held.

RWDSU president Stuart Applebaum welcomed the new California legislation but said a union contract “is better”.

Transparency about what warehouses required of its workers was needed, he said, but “many other issues” had to be addressed.

In June, the US Teamsters Union announced it was also aiming to recruit Amazon workers.

Amazon is launching Astro, its first household robot, powered by its Alexa smart home technology.

The company said it can be remote-controlled when not at home, to check on pets, people, or home security.

It can also patrol a home automatically and send owners a notification if it detects something unusual.

Amazon said it was more than “Alexa with wheels” and had been programmed with a range of movements and expressions to give it personality.

It demonstrated asking Astro to “beatbox” – and the robot bopped its head and made expressions while playing hip-hop beats.

Amazon was also keen to pre-empt privacy concerns.

It said Astro can be set with “out of bounds” zones, so it cannot go into certain areas, or could be set to “do not disturb”. It also features buttons to turn off cameras and microphones – though it loses its ability to move around when they are switched off.

The small robot also comes equipped with an extendable “periscope” camera that pops up from its head. Amazon showed an example of using it to check if a gas hob had been left on after leaving the house.

The technology and retail giant suggested that the $999.99 (£740) robot could be a help to the elderly.

“Astro is a bold move by Amazon, but a logical step given its expertise in robots and desire to become more integrated into consumers’ daily lives,”said Ben Wood, chief analyst at CCS Insight.

Unlike some rivals, Amazon “is willing to bring highly experimental products to market” and see how customers react, he said.

Why Amazon knows so much about you
Amazon pays £492m in UK tax as sales hit £20.6bn
Older Kindles may lose internet connection
“Offering products resembling something from a science fiction novel positions Amazon as an innovative company in the eyes of consumers and investors,” he said.

The robot will ship later this year, Amazon said – but only in the US. And after the initial, limited run, its price will go up to $1,449.99, it said.

“I believe the Astro robot will sell out in minutes when it becomes available in the US market,” Mr Wood said. “I’m just gutted that it won’t be shipping in the UK in the foreseeable future.”

Amazon wants a slice of the robotics market, boldly stating that it believes all homes will have one in five to 10 years.

It wants Astro to be that must-have new member of the household, and there is no denying that the little wheeled robot is pretty cute – although the periscope that pops out of its head is a little creepy.

But we have seen other cute humanoid robots – such as Pepper – fail to make a mark.

This is largely because the price tag means it will be a toy for the rich for some time to come. And while Amazon was keen to convince us that for that you get more than “Alexa on wheels”, it was hard to see a compelling use case for this other than to curb that ever-present paranoia that you left the oven on.

But building robots is hard. And if the home robotics market is ever going to take off, people will have to be convinced to spend a lot of money.

This first foray offers Amazon a chance to hone its skills. And arguably, there is no company already as firmly embedded in our homes as Amazon.

Presentational grey line
The company is known for occasionally making unusual smart home tech such as its Alexa-controlled microwave from 2018.

At last year’s event, Amazon turned heads with a flying indoor alarm drone. The Always Home Cam launches from its deployment bay if it detects a potential intrusion, and can fly around a home to check with a video feed. But it was not launched and no more details were released in the past year.

Instead, Amazon on Tuesday said it was opening up the invite list for early adopters to buy the drone on a limited basis – but did not give dates for widespread availability.

Among the other devices unveiled at the event was the the Amazon Glow: a video calling device that has the ability to project an interactive “touchscreen” on the floor or table in front of it.

The idea is to engage children during long video calls, as they can play games or draw on the 19-inch projected “screen” while on the video call. Relatives on the other end can also interact with the projection through a tablet app.

In one example, Amazon said children could “scan” a favourite toy using the Glow’s camera, and turn it into a jigsaw puzzle to reassemble.

Other new products announced included:

a Disney-themed Alexa version, featuring the voices of Disney characters, to be rolled out next year
updates to the Amazon Halo workout band, with a new model called Halo View.
a new model of Ring smart alarm with a built-in wifi router
a paid “virtual security guard” Ring subscription which allows a remote operator to check cameras triggered by motion detection
The event also coincided with the launch of Amazon’s much-delayed video game New World, its second attempt at a big-budget title after the high-profile failure of its shooter Crucible last year.

Unlike Crucible, however, New World received some favourable feedback during a popular beta test in July which attracted hundreds of thousands of players.

Plans to make an “Instagram experience” for under-13s, dubbed Instagram Kids, have been paused.

Facebook would use the time to listen to “parents, experts, policymakers and regulators”, Instagram head Adam Mosseri wrote.

It follows leaked internal research the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) said showed Instagram was “toxic for teen girls”.

But in a recent blog, Facebook head of research Pratiti Raychoudhury called this allegation “simply not accurate”.

Instagram requires users to be at least 13 before they create an account – but many children under that age use the platform anyway.

And the company previously told BBC News Instagram Kids would be a “practical solution to the ongoing industry problem of kids lying about their age to access apps” and enable children to connect with family and friends in an “age appropriate way”.

But in April, a letter from the Campaign for a Commercial-free Childhood, signed by 99 groups and individuals, claimed the “image-obsessed” platform was dangerous for children’s health and privacy and called for the project to be scrapped.

Supervision tools
In the new blog post, Mr Mosseri said he still believed it was better to have a version of Instagram for 10-12-year-olds, rather “than relying on an app’s ability to verify the age of kids who are too young to have an ID”.

“The reality is that kids are already online,” he said.

While the project is paused, Instagram will expand its work on new opt-in parental supervision tools, to cover 13-19-year-olds currently on Instagram.

There would be more announcements on that in the coming months, Mr Mosseri wrote.

And while he disagreed with the WSJ’s interpretation of the leaked research it had “raised a lot of questions for people”.

Facebook urged to end Instagram for children idea
Facebook Files: 5 things leaked documents reveal
In 2020, teenage girls were asked when they felt bad about their bodies did Instagram make them feel:

worse – 32%
better – 22%
“no impact” – 46%
But Facebook said the survey:

“relied on input from only 40 teens”
was deliberately focused on the most negative aspects of Instagram, to help the company make improvements
showed body image was the only one of 12 possible teenage problems Instagram made worse for girls
In other areas such as eating issues, loneliness, anxiety and sadness, “teenage girls who said they experienced these challenges were more likely to say that Instagram made these issues better v worse,” it said.

“The research actually demonstrated that many teens we heard from feel that using Instagram helps them when they are struggling with the kinds of hard moments and issues teenagers have always faced”, Ms Raychoudhury wrote, two weeks after the WSJ report, part of its Facebook Files series.

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
View original tweet on Twitter
But technology news site The Verge said Facebook’s response “ignores many of the issues raised in the WSJ piece, including that teens claimed they felt addicted to Instagram”.

Commentators have challenged Facebook to make public the research.

And on Monday, a Facebook representative told BBC News it planned to release some of the research material to Congress.

“Our plan is to release the two most noteworthy source decks to Congress and we’re looking at a potential public release,” they said.

“Our intention is that they will become public.”

Facebook global head of safety Antigone Davis will answer questions at forthcoming US Senate committee, where she is expected to be asked about the WSJ report and plans for Instagram Kids.

This week, Facebook has faced a series of accusations about its internal workings, based on revelations in the Wall Street Journal and elsewhere.

Much of the information comes from Facebook’s own internal documents, suggesting the company now has some whistle-blowers in its ranks.

The documents will provide governments and regulators with plenty to pore over as they consider their next moves.

However, Facebook has defended itself against all the accusations.

Here are five things that were revealed this week:

Celebrities were treated differently by Facebook

According to documents reported by the Wall Street Journal, many celebrities, politicians and high-profile Facebook users had different rules governing what content they could post, under a system known as XCheck (cross-check).

Facebook has admitted criticism of the way it implemented its cross-check system was “fair” – but said it was designed to create “an additional step” when posted content required more understanding.

“This could include activists raising awareness of instances of violence or journalists reporting from conflict zones,” it said.

It said a lot of documents referred to by the Wall Street Journal contained “outdated information stitched together to create a narrative that glosses over the most important point: Facebook itself identified the issues with cross-check and has been working to address them”.

Despite its pushback, Facebook’s own Oversight Board, which it appointed to make decisions on tricky content moderation, has demanded more transparency.

In a blog this week, it said the disclosures had “drawn renewed attention to the seemingly inconsistent way that the company makes decisions”.

It has asked for a detailed explanation of how the cross-check system works.

It warned a lack of clarity on cross-check could contribute to perceptions that Facebook was “unduly influenced by political and commercial considerations”.

Since it began its work looking into how Facebook moderates content, the Facebook-funded Oversight Board has made 70 recommendations about how the company should improve its policies. It has now set up a team to assess how the social network implements those recommendations.

Its response to employee concerns about human trafficking was often ‘weak’

The documents reported by the WSJ also suggested Facebook employees regularly flagged information about drug cartels and human traffickers on the platform but the company’s response was “weak”.

In November 2019, BBC News Arabic broadcast a report highlighting the issue of domestic workers for sale on Instagram.

According to internal documents, Facebook was already well aware of the issue. The WSJ reported that Facebook took only limited action until Apple threatened to remove its products from its App Store.

In its defence, Facebook said it had a “comprehensive strategy” to keep people safe including “global teams with native speakers covering over 50 languages, educational resources and partnerships with local experts and third-party fact-checkers”.

Critics warn that Facebook does not have the means to moderate all the content on its platform and protect its 2.8 billion users.

David Kirkpatrick, author of The Facebook Effect, told the BBC’s Tech Tent podcast that he felt Facebook had no motivation “to do anything to mediate the harms” outside the US.

“They have plenty of things they have done, including hiring tens of thousands of content reviewers,” he said.

“But one statistic that jumped out for me from the Wall Street Journal was that for all their disinformation and misinformation work in 2020, only 13% of that work was outside of the United States.

“For a service that is 90% outside of the United States – and one that has had enormous impact, in a very negative way, on the politics of countries like the Philippines, Poland, Brazil, Hungary, Turkey – they are not doing anything to remediate all that.”

Mr Kirkpatrick suggested Facebook was only “responsive to PR pressures” in the US because those could affects its share price.

Facebook faces a huge lawsuit from shareholders
Facebook is also facing a complex lawsuit from a group of its own shareholders.

The group alleges, among other things, that Facebook’s $5bn (£3.65bn) payment to the US Federal Trade Commission to resolve the Cambridge Analytica data scandal was so high because it was designed to protect Mark Zuckerberg from personal liability.

Facebook said it did not have anything to say about the continuing legal matter.

Has Facebook been promoting positive stories about itself?
This week, the New York Times suggested that Facebook had started an initiative to pump pro-Facebook content into people’s news feeds in order to boost its image.

The newspaper said Project Amplify was designed to “show people positive stories about the social network”.

Facebook said there had been no changes to its newsfeed ranking systems.

In a series of tweets, spokesman Joe Osborne said the test of what he called “an informational unit on Facebook” was small and only happened in “three cities”, with posts clearly labelled as coming from the firm.

He said it was “similar to corporate responsibility initiatives people see in other technology and consumer products”.

Facebook knew Instagram was ‘toxic’ for teens

Another significant revelation from the Facebook Files was the discovery that the company had conducted detailed research into how Instagram was affecting teenagers but did not share its findings when they suggested that the platform was a “toxic” place for many youngsters.

According to slides reported by the Wall Street Journal, 32% of teenage girls surveyed said that when they felt bad about their bodies, Instagram made them feel worse.

Fox News reported this week that the whistle-blower behind the leaked document will reveal their identity and co-operate with Congress.

Whether that happens, the fact that Facebook failed to share its own detailed studies on the harm its platforms cause will give US politicians plenty of food for thought.

Manufacturers will be forced to create a universal charging solution for phones and small electronic devices, under a new rule proposed by the European Commission (EC).

The aim is to reduce waste by encouraging consumers to re-use existing chargers when buying a new device.

All smartphones sold in the EU must have USB-C chargers, the proposal said.

Apple has warned such a move would harm innovation.

The tech giant is the main manufacturer of smartphones using a custom charging port, as its iPhone series uses an Apple-made “Lightning” connector.

“We remain concerned that strict regulation mandating just one type of connector stifles innovation rather than encouraging it, which in turn will harm consumers in Europe and around the world,” the firm told the BBC.

It added that it aims to make every Apple device and usage carbon neutral by 2030.

Most Android phones come with USB micro-B charging ports, or have already moved to the more modern USB-C standard.

New models of the iPad and MacBook use USB-C charging ports, as do high-end phone models from popular Android manufacturers such as Samsung and Huawei.

The changes would apply to the charging port on the device body, whereas the end of the cable connecting to a plug could be USB-C or USB-A.

Around half of chargers sold with mobile phones in the European Union in 2018 had a USB micro-B connector, while 29% had a USB C connector and 21% a Lightning connector, a Commission impact assessment study in 2019 found.

The proposed rules will apply to:

smartphones
tablets
cameras
headphones
portable speakers
handheld video game consoles
Other products including earbuds, smart-watches and fitness trackers were not considered for technical reasons linked to size and use conditions.

The proposal also standardises fast charging speeds – meaning devices capable of fast charging will be charged at the same speeds.

Preventing waste
EU politicians have been campaigning for a common standard for over a decade, with the Commission’s research estimating that disposed of and unused charging cables generate more than 11,000 tonnes of waste per year.

In the European Union, around 420 million mobile phones and other portable electronic devices were sold in the last year.

The average person owns around three mobile phone chargers, of which they use two regularly.

In 2009, there were more than 30 different chargers, whereas now most models stick to three – the USB-C, Lightning and USB micro-B.

“Having one common charging standard would be a victory for common sense in the eyes of consumers,” Ben Wood, an analyst at CCS Insight said.

“Although Apple has made a strong argument for keeping its Lightning connector, given the one billion active iPhone users, some of its products including Mac and iPad now support USB-C.

“Hopefully it will eventually become a non-issue if Apple keeps adding USB-C to more devices.”

It may be a number of years before the proposals come into effect.

The legislative proposal, known as a Directive, will be debated by the European Parliament and national governments.

MEPs and member states may suggest amendments to the proposal. Only once the EC has agreed these amendments, will the directive be enacted.

The EC hopes that will happen in 2022 – after which member states usually have two years to enact the rules into national law, and manufacturers will have 24 months to change their charging ports.

“We gave industry plenty of time to come up with their own solutions, now time is ripe for legislative action for a common charger. This is an important win for our consumers and environment and in line with our green and digital ambitions,” Commission Vice President Margrethe Vestager said.