Sarah Wynne Williams, a former Meta employee, has unveiled shocking revelations about how the company—previously known as Facebook—was willing to sell its soul for a foothold in the Chinese market. In her book and a scathing 78-page complaint filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), she paints a grim picture: Meta, under the leadership of Mark Zuckerberg, was prepared to sacrifice free speech and user privacy to appease the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). This isn’t just a scandal—it’s a tale of a tech giant attempting to strike a deal with the devil.

Williams, who once served as Meta’s director of global policy, asserts that the company developed a censorship system as early as 2015 to break into China. Documents she shared with *The Washington Post* reveal that Facebook didn’t just plan to filter content to suit Beijing’s tastes—it proposed creating a chief editor position to suppress “inconvenient” posts during times of social unrest. Even more alarming, Meta was ready to grant Chinese authorities access to users’ personal data, from names and addresses to private messages—all to win the CCP’s favor.

“Zuckerberg and his team didn’t just want a piece of China’s market—they were willing to hand over control of content and privacy to get it,” Williams declares. Her words aren’t mere accusations; they’re a desperate cry, exposing how one of the world’s largest tech companies could become a tool of an authoritarian regime. She directly labels Zuckerberg’s actions a betrayal of the principles on which Facebook was built—freedom of expression and user protection.

Meta, unsurprisingly, didn’t sit idly by. In a swift rebuttal, the company dismissed Williams as “an employee fired eight years ago for poor performance.” “Yes, we explored entering the Chinese market—it’s no secret, it was widely discussed a decade ago. But we abandoned those plans, and Mark Zuckerberg publicly confirmed this in 2019. We don’t operate in China,” Meta insists. Yet, these assurances ring hollow against the detailed evidence Williams submitted to the SEC.

But can we trust a company that, according to Williams, already built a censorship machine for Beijing? If Meta was willing to make such concessions for China, what’s stopping it from doing so again—or perhaps already doing it behind closed doors? Williams’ allegations aren’t just a relic of the past; they’re a stark warning about what tech giants are capable of when billions of dollars and access to 1.4 billion Chinese users are at stake.

The scandal is only heating up, but one thing is already clear: trust in Meta is crumbling. Was this merely a failed experiment, or does Zuckerberg still dream of the Chinese market, masking his ambitions with loud denials? Time will tell. For now, every post on Facebook might prompt a chilling question: who else has access to it?