> Mr. Stamos had been a strong advocate inside the company for investigating and disclosing Russian activity on Facebook, often to the consternation of other top executives, including Sheryl Sandberg, the social network’s chief operating officer, according to the current and former employees, who asked not to be identified discussing internal matters.
I guess I shouldn't be too surprised. He was for disclosing this information which ostracized him from the other executives who don't seem to care at all in regard to how their data is used as long as they profit from it.
It’s right there in the quote: “...according to the current and former employees, who asked not to be identified discussing internal matters“.
And before you criticize anonymous sources: that’s how journalism works. The publication, the New York Times in this case, takes on the risk to its reputation on behalf of their sources to allow information from unauthorized sources to become public.
Edit: editing your post to erase your embarrassing ineptitude to read (and to make the people correcting you seem foolish) seems kinda assholish.
I guess I shouldn't be too surprised. He was for disclosing this information which ostracized him from the other executives who don't seem to care at all in regard to how their data is used as long as they profit from it.