Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg wants ‘active role’ in shaping Trump’s tech policy, says exec Nick Clegg

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg reportedly wants to play an “active role” in shaping technology policy under a potential new Donald Trump administration, according to comments made by Nick Clegg, Meta’s President of Global Affairs. The remarks, revealed in a recent internal meeting and later reported by The Financial Times, have fueled debate over how Silicon Valley’s most powerful figures might align themselves with shifting political dynamics in Washington.

Zuckerberg’s outreach signals a potential recalibration in the relationship between Big Tech and the federal government, which has often been marked by tension over content moderation, antitrust scrutiny, and data privacy regulation. If accurate, this would represent a notable pivot from Zuckerberg’s previously cautious approach toward Trump-era policies and Republican lawmakers.

Development

According to reports, Clegg told Meta employees that Zuckerberg intends to “work constructively” with whoever occupies the White House in 2025, including Trump if he is reelected. He emphasized that Meta aims to ensure its interests—and those of the broader technology industry—are represented as the next administration defines its approach to artificial intelligence, social media regulation, and online speech.

“Mark wants to take an active role in shaping what comes next,” Clegg was quoted as saying, adding that “technology moves faster than politics, and it’s important we help bridge that gap.” His comments came during a town hall-style meeting that also addressed concerns over misinformation, platform neutrality, and potential regulatory pressures on AI-driven products such as Meta’s Llama 3 models.

Clegg’s statements come at a time when Meta is under renewed scrutiny from both political parties. Conservatives have long accused the company of bias and censorship, particularly during the 2020 election cycle, while Democrats have criticized its role in spreading misinformation and undermining public trust. The company’s balancing act between these pressures may explain Zuckerberg’s desire to establish more direct communication channels with policymakers in both camps.

Industry observers say the move reflects a broader trend among Silicon Valley executives, who increasingly recognize the need for proactive engagement with Washington rather than reactive lobbying. Companies like Google, Apple, and X (formerly Twitter) have also stepped up their policy operations, anticipating a new wave of digital regulation focused on privacy, AI safety, and foreign influence.

Analysts note that Zuckerberg’s potential collaboration with a second Trump administration could be particularly complex. During Trump’s first term, Meta faced sharp criticism from both the White House and Congress over content moderation practices and allegations of political bias. Any renewed partnership would likely require careful negotiation to avoid further reputational damage while maintaining influence over critical policy areas.

Meta has already begun positioning itself as a leader in responsible AI governance, launching transparency initiatives and emphasizing its open-source approach. However, the company’s role in shaping policy could raise questions about corporate influence on democratic processes—especially given Meta’s vast reach across Facebook, Instagram, Threads, and WhatsApp.

Nick Clegg, a former UK deputy prime minister, has often served as Meta’s intermediary with governments worldwide. His assertion that Zuckerberg seeks an “active role” may indicate a more assertive lobbying strategy in Washington, one that goes beyond defensive legal battles and focuses on policy creation. This could include direct consultations with Trump’s advisers or congressional committees on technology, privacy, and national security.

Critics warn that closer alignment between Meta and any political administration risks blurring the line between platform neutrality and political influence. Advocates for digital rights have urged tech companies to prioritize transparency and accountability, particularly when engaging with policymakers who have previously challenged their independence.

Zuckerberg’s renewed interest in policy shaping also coincides with Meta’s growing ambitions in artificial intelligence. The company’s investments in generative AI, immersive VR experiences, and large-scale data infrastructure place it at the forefront of several policy debates, from algorithmic transparency to workforce automation. Ensuring favorable regulatory conditions could be critical to sustaining these initiatives in the coming years.

At the same time, Meta continues to navigate mounting global challenges, including EU investigations into user data handling, Canadian laws on content compensation, and competition from platforms like TikTok. Engaging directly with U.S. policymakers could strengthen Meta’s domestic footing as it fends off international constraints.

Political insiders suggest that Zuckerberg’s approach is pragmatic rather than partisan. While his outreach to Trump’s circle may grab headlines, he is equally likely to engage with Democratic policymakers to ensure continuity and stability for Meta’s operations regardless of who holds power. The overarching goal, they say, is to maintain a seat at the table where technology policy is written—rather than reacting from the sidelines.

FAQ – Frequently Asked Questions

1. What did Nick Clegg say about Zuckerberg’s involvement in Trump’s tech policy?
   He said that Zuckerberg wants to play an “active role” in shaping technology policy and ensuring Meta collaborates constructively with any future administration, including Trump’s.
2. Has Mark Zuckerberg publicly commented on this?
   No official statement has been issued by Zuckerberg himself, but Meta representatives have emphasized the company’s nonpartisan approach to government relations.
3. Why is Meta seeking closer ties with policymakers now?
   With rising global scrutiny over AI, privacy, and misinformation, Meta aims to influence policy discussions rather than react to new regulations after they are implemented.
4. What challenges does Meta face in Washington?
   Meta faces bipartisan criticism—Republicans accuse it of censorship, while Democrats blame it for misinformation and social harm. Balancing both sides remains a major challenge.
5. How might this affect Meta’s AI strategy?
   Zuckerberg’s policy engagement could help shape favorable regulations for AI innovation, allowing Meta to expand its open-source models and commercial applications.
6. What role does Nick Clegg play at Meta?
   As President of Global Affairs, Clegg oversees the company’s relationships with governments and regulators, serving as Meta’s chief diplomatic voice.
7. Would working with Trump be a major shift for Meta?
   Yes. During Trump’s first term, Meta’s relationship with the White House was strained; closer cooperation would mark a significant change in tone and strategy.
8. Could Meta face backlash for engaging with Trump?
   Potentially. Critics may view it as politically motivated or compromising platform neutrality, while supporters may see it as pragmatic engagement.
9. How does this fit into Silicon Valley’s broader political trends?
   It reflects growing recognition among tech leaders that policy engagement is essential for long-term stability and innovation in a highly regulated environment.
10. What’s next for Meta’s policy strategy?
    Meta is expected to expand its government affairs team and engage in policy discussions around AI safety, online speech, and data governance throughout 2025.

Conclusion

Mark Zuckerberg’s reported desire to take an “active role” in shaping Trump’s potential technology policy underscores Meta’s evolving political strategy in an era of heightened regulation and rapid innovation. By working proactively with policymakers, Zuckerberg aims to ensure that technological progress aligns with the company’s interests—and perhaps, its vision for the future of digital society.

Whether this approach strengthens Meta’s influence or invites new controversy remains to be seen. But one thing is clear: as politics and technology converge more tightly than ever, the architects of Silicon Valley will continue to play a decisive role in shaping the rules that govern the digital world.