It’s a paper moon: it only works if you believe in it
How many of you have read the Meta tell-all, Careless People? This book has been on the New York Times best seller list since its release and is continuing to sell well. The book was authored by Facebook’s former director of global public policy, Sarah Wynn-Williams, and is a roundup of all bad doings by Meta and its executives, particularly their head of global public policy.
I’ll be upfront — I haven’t read it. To be honest, the topic doesn’t interest me that much. What does interest me is the maelstrom around the release of the book. There is a Vanity Fair article titled “Meta’s Response to Explosive Tell-All Is Ripped From a Familiar PR Playbook,” which looks at the book and Meta’s actions to try to stop and discredit the author. It’s worth the read.
And with headlines like these, you can see why Meta is mad:
- “Careless People: We read the book that Mark Zuckerberg doesn’t want you to read. We can see why”
- “Meta is trying to silence a former executive. In an interview, she tells BI why”
- “A Facebook Insider’s Exposé Alleges Bad Behavior at the Top”
What has intrigued me the most is that, before anything came to light, Meta tried to enforce a Non Disparagement Agreement. For those of you not familiar, this type of document falls within the Non Disclosure Agreement (NDA) family and tries to ensure that neither signer can say something bad about the other.
When the author left Meta, her severance agreement included the Non Disparagement Clause, and Meta took the case to the court of arbitration. Not surprisingly, the court ruled in favor of Meta and directed Sarah Wynn-Williams “to stop making ‘disparaging’ remarks against Meta and, where possible, cease promoting or publishing the book.”
But here is the thing about these agreements – they only work when the risk outweighs the reward for the person governed by the agreement. And, when an organization is trying to enforce these agreements it should calculate that same formula – because, as Meta found out, there are significant risks.
So yes, Meta succeeded in ensuring that the author, her family, and her friends wouldn’t speak about the book for a while – and not in front of the U.S. Senate. But it also succeeded in making her book a bestseller, ensuring her claims were published thousands of times and are now part of the Congressional Record. They have also exposed their PR playbook.
This begs the question, was it worth it?
Listen, we believe in abject confidentiality for our clients. We don’t talk about them. We include confidentiality clauses in our contracts to protect them, but our preferred way to work when we are brought into a crisis is under the cloak of attorney-client privilege.
Why? Because everything else we do requires proactive action if anyone breaks these agreements. That proactive action – likely filing a lawsuit – draws attention to the very things that we don’t want to talk about, which is exactly what Meta has done here.
Reputational Damage (a.k.a “Now Everyone’s Got an Opinion About You”)
These agreements are only good until they aren’t. As business leaders, you need to factor in that risk. It starts with implementing them to begin with. By having these agreements in place, you are destroying good will with your employees. It tells them that they can’t be trusted and that you know they will leave and betray you.
And, if you are doing something so bad that it getting out into the public would be disastrous, then you need to do some internal examinations. Those things tend to get out no matter how much legalese you put around them.
However, if you decide to go this route, the next calculation should be when, where, and how to enforce them. This is when you really need to calculate the risk versus the reward. Ask yourself the question, does trying to enforce these agreements make the situation worse ?
This is the question Meta should have asked – if for no other reason than Congressional testimony: permanent, televised, and to people who can act on what they hear.
Beyond Congress, your employees start to question leadership and your business partners start raising an eyebrow.
Regulatory Scrutiny (a.k.a. “You Just Invited the Government to the Party”)
We’re living in a different regulatory moment. Whether it sticks is anyone’s guess, but here’s what we know: agencies are watching, and they’re not amused.
- The SEC has made it clear — you can’t use NDAs to muzzle whistleblowers.
- The NLRB ruled in 2023 that overreaching non-disparagement clauses in severance agreements can break labor law.
- And the EEOC? They’ve warned that any language that chills reports of harassment or discrimination is a non-starter.
Legal Blowback (a.k.a. “You Wanted Quiet, Now Everyone’s Listening”)
Even if you think your clause is airtight, if it ends up in front of a judge and gets tossed for being too broad or coercive, congratulations — you’ve just opened the door to the exact scrutiny you were trying to avoid.
- You may lose the clause
- You may lose the whole agreement
- And you’ll definitely lose control of the story.
Worse still, you look like you were trying to cover something up. Which brings us to …
Culture Shock (and Not the Good Kind)
Let’s be real — when you slap these agreements on your people, you’re telling them two things:
- We don’t trust you
- We think you’ll turn on us the second you walk out the door
Even if that’s not what you meant, that’s how it lands. And it matters. You’re not just chilling speech — you’re freezing morale. Feedback dries up. People stop raising concerns. And you end up with a workforce that smiles in meetings and updates their résumés at lunch.
And here’s the kicker: while you’re feeling safe behind your legalese, the real damage is being done — by leaks, DMs, Signal threads, or congressional microphones.
As a hat tip to my lawyer friends, if you do decide the risk is worth it, find a really great lawyer and keep them on retainer. Then have them hire us. We love working with lawyers.
Kith facilitates crisis preparedness workshops that will help your company attain the clarity, trust, and speed you need to respond confidently – no dithering! – to any crisis. We’d be happy to have a conversation about how we can help your company be ready to chart an effective course to reputation protection.
