Joan Donovan, a seasoned expert with a decade of experience studying misinformation, has accused Harvard University of caving in to pressure from Facebook executives, both current and former. This comes in the wake of a substantial $500 million pledge to Harvard's AI institute by Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan ’07.
Donovan, who served as the research director for Harvard Kennedy School projects focusing on misinformation and disinformation on social media platforms, alleged that her project was abruptly terminated and she was dismissed due to Facebook-related pressures. She has taken her concerns to the US Education Department and the Massachusetts attorney general.
A significant figure in her field, Donovan had secured millions in grants, testified before Congress, and frequently provided expert commentary for media outlets like The Washington Post. The turning point in her situation occurred in 2023 when the school's dean informed her that her main project was winding down, and later her position was eliminated, surprising fellow researchers in the field.
The genesis of Donovan's claims lies in the 22,000 pages of internal Facebook documents leaked by whistleblower Frances Haugen. Donovan believed these leaks were of public interest and began publishing them on Harvard's website. She contends that her treatment by the university changed from that point onward, leading to the loss of her job.
Harvard vehemently denies Donovan's accusations, stating that claims of unfair treatment and donor interference are untrue. A spokesperson for Harvard, James Francis Smith, insisted that the narrative is riddled with inaccuracies and baseless insinuations, particularly the notion that Facebook influenced Harvard's research approach.
Known for her outspoken criticism of powerful social media platforms profiting from divisive misinformation, Donovan presented her findings during a virtual meeting of the Kennedy School's dean council in October 2021. During this meeting, Elion Schrage, Facebook's former head of policy, vehemently opposed Donovan's work, arguing against the platform being the "arbiter of truth and falsity." Schrage contended that journalists and academics often label politicians they dislike as "misinformation."
Approximately a week later, the school's dean, Douglas Elmendorf, emailed Donovan, questioning her approach to researching misinformation in a climate where there is no independent arbiter of truth and constitutional protections of speech vary across countries.
