How did 60 Minutes miss this?

This journalist has a valid reason for not wanting to join Facebook

"Why would I want to waste my time on Facebook when I still haven't read Keats' Endymion? ...And if I want to connect with the people around me, I will revert to an old piece of technology. It's free, it's easy and it delivers a uniquely individual experience in sharing information: it's called talking."

But what's baffling is his speculation ahead of this conclusion. About concerns about neo-conservative board members and links to the CIA. Well, actually the CIA speculation is not new. He is repeating what was rumored on Digg over 2 years ago. And what another journalist from New Zealand similarly speculated a few months earlier.

Get this - The CIA acknowledges it does use Facebook. But like any other potential employer would as this ABC News item reports.

The reality is every major technology vendor around the world does business with defense and intelligence agencies. Just about every Israeli technology company does. IBM does. Oracle does. The telcos are seeking immunity for some of their work with intelligence agencies. So, would he recommend not doing business with any of them?

If there was something really juicy and sinister, you think normally tough 60 Minutes would have completely ignored that in its segment on Facebook this Sunday?

My POV - the journalist should read Keats. Because, I think he may have been reading too much Tom Clancy.

Comments

[Dennis Howlett]

Disagree. When you strip away the admittedly left wing hubris, Tim did a pretty solid job. Leslie Stahl had done a good amount of homework but she kid gloved a chap who was way out of his depth.

I think though you're missing the point. The accusation is that the partners in this venture have direct or indirect links to the CIA. That's very different from doing business. It implies a level of influence I would not expect to see in a company of this size or age.

[vinnie mirchandani]

Dennis, there is quite a bit of public information about the In-Q-Tel, the CIA VC arm - several articles have been written about it for years now. So it far less cloak and dagger than the journalist suggests. It invests in data mining, digital mapping and other start ups which have since been sold to IBM, Google etc - public companies with disclosure requirements.

Besides it does not appear to be an investor in FB. The article suggests linkage because Greylock invested in it and one of their partners is also on board of In-Q-tel. By that extension you could find similar linkages on countless other boards.

I pointed out article where they say they use it for recruiting like many other companies use FB as a resource

Not sure how you say he did a solid job.
If you compare the Guardian and the NZ article it is almost ditto and did not break new ground and just implies the CIA is involved in sinister ways.