B.J. Fogg is an expert in behavior design and helped push humane tech of persuasive technology:
Many of the students that were part of his lab went on to apply his behavior manipulation teachings [1] in leadership positions to engineer us into today's situation. Now, he is decrying the state of affairs he helped bring about. Pinches of salt recommended.
[1] https://www.amazon.com/Mobile-Persuasion-Perspectives-Future... https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/9781558606432/persuasive-...
It's been well over 20 years since his work started was published. That's a full generation to see the effects of technology and mainstream adoption while comparing it to your life's work. I think it's fair to see someone decry the state of affairs when they were already on that side of the fence. It's quite unfair to attribute his involvement as something malicious though. Behavior science itself is already an ethical dilemma.
Maybe the 2007 book has something else in it, but I always got the opinion that famous founders simply attended the class and may/may not have used what they learned in it. Not that he was involved outside of it. But who knows who is in each other's pocket. I still like the guy as his message hasn't really changed.
Simply echoing the OP comment for B.J. Fogg as well. Nothing more.
His book Tiny Habits is a decent read actually. That does not however lend support to your initial unrepresentative statement about his work in persuasive technology.
His sense of research ethics is beyond the scope of this thread. But since you brought up that dimension in your reply, you might want to consider the fact that he worked as an assistant [2] for Philip Zimbardo [3] who conducted the infamous Stanford Prison Experiment [4].
[1] https://www.linkedin.com/school/behaviordesign-bootcamp/peop... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B._J._Fogg#Education [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Zimbardo [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment