Data-Labor-Technology

Often, the likes of Facebook and YouTube will say they have removed content, but there’s little transparency into what they’ve removed and how they’ve done it, said Mukherjee. The hope is for other advertisers and social networks to back the project so that it becomes a cross-industry project maintained and promoted by many stakeholders.

“We need to use our influence as advertisers to hold the social media platforms more accountable to how they take down hate speech so that it becomes a more transparent process,” said Mukherjee who Digiday caught up with to hear more about why Pernod Ricard is going beyond the boycott to tackle hate speech on the social network and ask how the company is setting itself up to meet new expectations from society.

Why develop an app when other companies are withholding money from social networks?

We respect the boycott. We’ve paused paid campaigns on all the social networks we use throughout July. The boycott has created momentum around the issue of hate speech online, but what happens on August 1? By creating the app, we wanted it to be additive to the boycott by finding a way to make the way these platforms deal with hate speech more transparently. As advertisers, we need to be better at getting the social media platforms to live up to what they say they’re going to do. 

How will the app make it easier to see how social networks moderate hate speech?

There are these factions forming around hate speech and what we don’t know is whether these social media platforms are actually picking up these groups and choosing not to take them down. But if a consumer does see a hate speech faction they can use the app to flag it an then ask the social network they saw it on why it’s not been taken it down. The app won’t make a judgment on whether something is hate speech or misinformation. It will, however, provide some transparency around why a social media platform decides to either take that post down or leave it up. 

Are you using the time away from social media to think harder about the content you fund?

We’re the companies funding these social media platforms with hate speech on them so we accept that people could say we’re culpable too. It’s time for us as an advertiser to take that seriously. Yes, we are thinking about how to be more ethical with our spending. If a consumer tells us we’re associated with something that goes against our own company values then that’s not a place where we’re going to run ads on again. 

How does that ethical approach impact the way you plan campaigns?

The traditional way of targeting demographics is of yesteryear. People are multi-dimensional. We live in a world of advanced behavioral economics. And we’re advancing our efforts here to think about how we market our brands to people based on our understanding of how they behave in certain occasions. If someone is at home by themselves they behave differently to how they are with friends, regardless of the color of their skin. Those learnings form the basis of how we then create content and then find the media to reach them in ways that are fundamentally different to the traditional approach. 

The pressure isn’t likely to let up anytime soon as just over a week into the Stop Hate for Profit (SHFP) boycott there are over 1,000 advertisers participating. “Every meeting right now with Facebook is about this and only this,” said an executive for a digital agency with clients participating in the boycott. “There’s no escaping it — and that’s where change happens.” 

That said, the overall goals of civil rights advocates organizing the boycott differ slightly from those of advertisers, according to agency executives. The SHFP campaign has laid out ten recommended steps, including adding an executive with expertise in civil rights issues to the C-Suite as well as submitting to regular third-party audits, for Facebook to take to address the spread of hate speech and disinformation on the platform.

While participating advertisers generally support the ten recommended steps, the changes desired by advertisers, per agency executives in talks with both advertisers and Facebook, are more streamlined. 

Overall, advertisers want Facebook to clean up the content that appears on the platform, to have more control over where their ads appear and have the ability to opt out of ads appearing next to content that’s “questionable,” according to agency executives who say adding that type of control would be similar to what Google put in place with Google Preferred or YouTube Select. Per agency executives, doing so would in a sense “demonetize” that content and help quell some advertisers’ worries; fear of the screenshot of brand cohabitation with hate or misinformation has long driven advertisers to push platforms to do more to squash the spread of questionable or hateful content on their platforms. 

Advertisers also want Facebook to enact stronger policies against hate speech, however, advertisers “don’t want to be the arbiters of what hate speech is,” as one agency executive who requested anonymity put it, as that’s for civil rights groups to make clear to Facebook. Agency executives and media buyers also said that advertisers are lobbying Facebook for more transparency and third-party audits of Facebook’s own protocols for weeding out hate speech and bad content on the platform. 

Facebook has said that 89% of hate speech or problematic content is detected by its systems and removed before it is reported, up from 23% just three years ago. But without third-party audits, “we’re letting Facebook grade their own home work,” said the agency executive. “What a third-party audit will help us understand is the true strength of Facebook’s protocols. Right now we can only take Facebook on their word. On YouTube, I can rely on Open Slate, Double Verify and MOAT.” 

Amid the pressure from the boycott, the platform has already said it will work with the Media Ratings Council and undergo an audit of its platform. 

While Facebook has posted blog posts (updates on brand safety and racial justice initiatives) in response to calls for action from the platform, it’s unclear how it will respond to the other asks from advertisers or if those advertisers will remain off the platform come August 1 if Facebook fails to meet any of the other asks.

One agency executive said that it would be surprising if advertisers return en masse in early August without commitments to address advertisers’ desired changes. That said, returning to the platform will be a “brand-by- brand” decision, according to the exec.

As conversations continue between advertisers, agency executives and Facebook, there’s a sense that the pressure could force the platform to bend to the demands of advertisers. 

“If history is any indicator, this will linger and there won’t be a definitive resolution,” said Brendan Gahan, chief social officer at Mekanism, adding that, “to this day, YouTube is still dealing with fallout” following its demonetization of some creators.

Staffers pressed Protocol executive editor Tim Grieve and president Tammy Wincup on the state of the company. The site was two months old, but facing growing pains. Thanks to above-market salaries and the relative comfort of a wealthy backer, Washington, D.C.-based media mogul Robert Allbritton, Protocol had lured alumni of Wired, The New York Times and the Wall Street Journal. The company had an ambitious goal: To do for tech news coverage what Politico had done for politics coverage over a decade earlier. But the blueprint to achieving that goal was ambiguous. Working in his first job at a tech publication, Grieve disagreed with some of his staff over the direction of the site, favoring an approach geared toward helping the business elite understand the fast-changing tech landscape and less about the kind of aggressively investigative, or in his estimation, “opinionated” tech coverage produced by other newsrooms. On the video conference, staffers were told that, despite advertisers acting slower to make commitments, everything was fine.

Shortly thereafter, however, Protocol laid off 13 employees across the editorial and business sides, reducing the newsroom size by about half. Four of those forced out were people of color, leaving the already non-diverse Protocol almost entirely white. 

Employees felt stunned and misled. Ostensibly a business decision, the cuts also consolidated Protocol under Grieve’s plan of action. Editorial director Emily Dreyfuss, a former Wired writer and editor with whom he had clashed, was among the layoffs. 

“In any publication and particularly a start-up, where the mission and the vision can be a little ethereal until you really start typing words and publishing stories, there are going to be times when people agree and times when people disagree,” Grieve said. “I have huge respect for Emily.” Protocol has emerged from the layoffs with the same strategy, according to Grieve. “The vision was always to cover the people, power and politics of tech to help decision makers in tech, business, and public policy navigate a world in constant change.” The cuts were deep, Wincup said, in order to ensure Protocol could weather long-term economic uncertainty. 

Now, the outlet is an even-smaller player in the incredibly crowded tech journalism ecosystem, building an ad-based business in a harsh ad market and competing for scoops with national publishers (The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, Bloomberg), other newcomers (Axios, The Information), and established tech-focused outlets (The Verge, Wired, TechCrunch). 

This story is based on interviews with more than a dozen current and former Protocol staffers and people familiar with its leadership and development. Collectively, they paint a picture of an ambitious operation full of early struggles, in part due to coronavirus but also of the company’s own making. Inside the Allbritton empire, some have been openly wondering just how much runway will be extended to Protocol by the largely easygoing magnate, who likes to land his plane while traveling for business and quickly shut down another young news startup a decade ago.

Power play

In November 2019, Allbritton announced the creation of Protocol, telling Vanity Fair that the forthcoming site will “look at technology as a base of power.” Allbritton had desired a media foothold in Silicon Valley for some time. According to two people familiar with the matter, in 2017, Allbritton raised interest in partnership opportunities or a potential financial stake in the tech site The Information, but the talks did not materialize. (The Information co-founder Jessica Lessin declined to comment; Allbritton denied there was ever any discussion or offer for a financial stake).

Protocol, while separate from Politco, was to operate from the same playbook: as the ESPN of technology. In Protocol’s telling, the competitors weren’t doing it right. They were either too focused on a good-versus-evil storyline that vilified tech companies or they wrote about gadgets. That diagnosis was derided by competitors. This wasn’t 2010 anymore. Legacy newspapers had expanded their tech desks years ago to compete with a growing stable of digital upstarts. The result has been powerful tech journalism across the board. Gadget stories still exist, but tech coverage today is defined by sweeping investigations into important topics like misinformation on Facebook or digital privacy. It’s one of the most saturated areas in media.

Protocol nevertheless hoped to find its lane covering the inner workings of tech companies for a readership of stakeholders, from underlings to CEOs to policymakers. Faceless entities like Google and Facebook, the theory went, are full of currently-unknown people who have as much power and influence as senators. An outlet that burrowed into the center of that world, naming names, would become the essential read of the tech industry. “That mission of insidery and informed — but also with accountability journalism in the tech space — was attractive,” said one former employee. “Robert [Allbritton’s] catchphrase was that we’re going to ‘hug them close and punch them in the nose at the same time.’ They’re going to read us, but begrudgingly so.”

Protocol was ridiculed as unnecessary by competitors, but so too was Politico when it launched in 2007 against outlets like the Washington Post, Roll Call, and The Hill. Today it’s a force in the Washington media scene. Allbritton proved doubters wrong, and did so again in 2016 by continuing Politico’s upward trajectory even after losing longtime editor-in-chief Jim VandeHei, star Playbook creator Mike Allen and revenue chief Roy Schwartz to begin a rival outfit in Axios. At Axios, VandeHei and crew set their sites beyond Washington to focus on new power centers, particularly the rise of technology.

Eyeing Axios’ quick rise, Allbritton wanted to expand into new corridors of power too, as he did in Brussels in 2015 through Politico Europe. Unlike that project, Protocol was founded as its own separate entity, with plans to follow the Politico business model that couples free consumer-facing news coverage with subject area specific paid products. (Disclosure: I have written for Politico Magazine).

To lead Protocol, Allbritton turned to Politico veteran Grieve, who launched and ran the Politico Pro paid service. People who worked with Grieve at the time said he embodied the kind of macho attitude that characterized the early days of Politico. He had a reputation euphemistically described by the media press at the time as “hard-charging” or “combustible.” 

In 2013, he left Politico to become the editor-in-chief of the more sedate National Journal before joining McClatchy in 2016. Some who worked with Grieve after his Politico years believe he eased up, though others have found him still difficult to work with. “Your past is your past, and you can’t just erase that. I know that stuff will follow me around. All I can do is try to lead and manage people in ways that are effective,” he said.

Any tech publication from Allbritton was bound to create some degree of internal conflict. Politico has a tech reporting team and Morning Tech newsletter. Tech advertisers already partner with Politico, though for government affairs-related work. Protocol would need to expand into an uncharted B2B tech marketing space, and some internally wondered the strategic rationale of starting from scratch when you already own a big newsroom with a tech section. A source familiar with Protocol’s development said that even during pre-launch, in January and February, it was clear that ad revenue would not meet Protocol’s initial targets. (Protocol declined to comment)

To help smooth over concerns with Politico reporters, Grieve was advised by Matthew Kaminski, the founding editor of Politico Europe who had returned to headquarters (and was later named editor-in-chief). Kaminski helped Grieve and Allbritton strategize and make early hires. “There was a real desire to leverage Politico’s brand and strength,” said one former Protocol staffer. Jake Sherman and Anna Palmer, the authors of Politico Playbook, presented to Protocol about newsletter best practices, for instance. As the outlet took shape, Kaminski stepped to the side, and Protocol now shares little crossover with Politico other than the same owner. 

Bad timing

As launch approached, Protocol staffers started to doubt whether they could mirror the playbook of Politico, which created daily characters out of people who were inherently public: White House officials, members of Congress, lobbyists and legislative aides. No scoop was too small for Politico, especially during its first few years, and Washington sources with clear agendas happily whispered in reporters’ ears. Washington political reporting is far from easy, but there are two distinct teams to play off of each other. You can interview senators in the hallway. Tech companies, on the other hand, have little incentive to open up. Stories can be plodding and access tough to negotiate, particularly if you conduct hard-hitting reporting. Silicon Valley remains a power center, but “tech” has also become a much broader concept. “It’s harder to say, here is the story of the day in tech that is going to be universally interesting to everyone working in tech, because it’s such a big, sprawling, fast-moving thing,” Grieve said. 

Former staffers said that Grieve’s lack of tech journalism experience at times set him at odds with his own staff. Objectives other than access became elusive, and it was tough for employees to discern what defined a Protocol story. Plans for an investigative reporting team, for instance, were shelved after the hires had been made. When the layoffs hit, the two would-be investigative reporters were cut, and their editor later left to return to a promotion at his prior employer. “[Tim] brought in this team that did have a background in tech journalism. Looking back on it, he then proceeded not to listen to those people that he brought in,” said one former staffer. 

“I do not come from a tech background, and I’ve made no secret of that whatsoever,” Grieve said. “My experience is starting, rehabilitating, and leading publications and the teams that make them.”

When Protocol launched in February, it entered a more auspicious, pre-coronavirus media market. The outlet had staffed up quickly, with some 35 people working in multiple cities, from London to D.C. to San Francisco. Then the world changed. “It was a hell of a way to start your new publication, but that’s the world into which we were born,” Grieve said. 

Grieve highlighted some of the work he is most proud of in Protocol’s short history: a prescient story in late February about coronavirus taking a toll on Kickstarter campaigns; a scoop about the president of the Electronic Privacy Information Center failing to quarantine after taking a coronavirus test which came back positive (he later resigned); another scoop about Google’s coronavirus-related ad policies favoring Trump over the Democrats, which resulted in the company making changes. 

Protocol is too young to generate comScore traffic figures, but Grieve said that it has reached more than 3.5 million readers in less than five months. Protocol has three newsletters: one focusing on cloud and enterprise software, one on venture capital and startups, and its flagship, “Source Code,” a round-up of the biggest tech stories authored by former Wired writer David Pierce. According to two people familiar with the matter, Protocol purchased a distribution list of emails to automatically sign readers up for Source Code, receiving pushback from newsroom members who questioned the ethics. (Grieve and Wincup did not return a request for comment about the newsletter distribution list). 

Blindsided

Protocol is far from the only media company to suffer coronavirus-related layoffs, but the employees suffering the brunt of the cuts were still shocked. The site had only been up and running for 11 weeks, and they had been told during the hiring process that Protocol had a years-long timeline to figure things out. “Some people quit stable jobs based on this promise only to find themselves unexpectedly unemployed during a pandemic,” said a former staffer. 

Wincup, Protocol’s president who formerly worked for private equity firm TPG’s Rise Fund, said the layoffs were gut-wrenching but necessary. “Having this not be my first rodeo, the estimation was that the economic impact was going to be pretty long lasting,” she said. “I wanted to be really confident to take as much cost out so this would be the first and last round.”

(As part of Allbritton’s larger company, Protocol did not qualify for a Paycheck Protection Program loan used by many media companies to stave off job cuts.)

“As many media companies did, we did investigate PPP funds,” said Wincup in a statement to Digiday. “Unfortunately, Protocol did not qualify based on numerous factors including our governance structure which included our employee count with Politico. We found out this information after our April 8th Town Hall. Clearly, this greatly influenced our future decision-making.”  

In an email, Allbritton said that Protocol’s current performance means it is sustainable indefinitely. “We adapted quickly to ensure that Protocol could survive this storm and come out the other end healthy and ready to expand into what we believe has become the most important sector of the global economy,” he said. As the ad market slowly recovers, Wincup highlighted advertisers like Workday and products such as Braintrust, an sponsorable editorial project asking one big question to a handful of tech minds. “We are starting to see positive momentum and so we are looking to add a few new hires to Protocol— which reflects my optimism for the publication,” Allbritton said. Indeed, just months after the layoffs, Protocol has five open job listings (none of those laid off were offered the new roles). 

Grieve said that two other departures in June meant the company is “in the position to do some targeted hiring,” and he pledged that the additions will help change the makeup of the company. Protocol has employed an almost entirely white newsroom from its inception, and even more so since the layoffs. “Like tech and the media generally, we know that our staff is not as diverse as it should be,” he said. “It’s an area where I am confident we will see progress in the coming weeks and months.”

As Protocol tries to find its way, some inside the Allbritton universe have drawn comparisons to TBD, the ill-fated local news project he started in 2010. The rollout of TBD was similarly splashy, and Allbritton promised a three-plus year runway to profitability. Just a few months in, dozens of staffers were laid off and the project was shuttered. 

“That was really traumatic for a lot of people,” said Erik Wemple, the former editor of TBD and now a media critic at the Washington Post. “As awful as it was, there has not been a lot of developments on the local news front since 2010 and 2011 that would indicate that the decision to pull the plug was a disastrous financial decision. The disaster was to jump in the way they did to begin with, which of course I didn’t stop them from doing.”

Allbritton said TBD was a different product from a different era. “It was a bold experiment in radically expanding a local TV station’s web presence by using a hybrid of full time web reporters and community sourced news. Unfortunately, it was far too advanced for its market and never gained significant traction in either revenue or audience,” he said. While TBD was meant for a broad audience, Protocol is trying to emulate Politico’s formula of news for professionals, Allbritton said. 

Grieve, for his part, believes that Protocol is well positioned for the future, thanks in part to its chosen coverage area. “Coronavirus has rocked so many parts of the economy,” he said. “I think the overall consensus is that tech is going to emerge from it just fine.”