To be honest, I think it's great that light is being shone on these internal documents, but I have yet to hear any big revelations in these leaks, so I don't really understand why she would be eligible for a payout. I mean, they mostly say that Facebook is bad for societal discourse and bad for personal well-being. Color me shocked.

I haven't seen any evidence, for example, that Facebook tried to cover anything up. They just paid some people to do a bunch of research, which they then did nothing about because it would have had a negative impact on their bottom line. Literally every large company does this.

Don't get me wrong, I think Facebook is a horrible company and could very well be the downfall of society, but I just don't think that was a secret, and nothing in these reports makes me think any differently.

Under what whistleblower statute? There are various statutes that provide different percentages, but there are strict rules for qualification.

I haven't seen any indication that she is a qualifying whistleblower under any statute (though admittedly I am not deeply following these revelations).

Well that certainly changes our perception of her motivations. She claims to care about making social media better but probably just wants an easy payout.