At first the Facebook executive looked like someone who was actually "concerned", but then, I noticed that he would keep giving Facebook easy challenges to solve for them to appear "responsible" (usually during times when they were already being questioned), while viciously attacking competing companies.
He also commented on how Facebook wasn't doing enough to deal with things like foreign interference... This was at a time though when Facebook was already under pressure.
So, he would keep throwing them softballs of small clusters of accounts that he found and they would resolve them.
Also, on the issue of child safety, he would resort to tactics like describing the details of someone being abused to defend Facebook's scanning practices, however, he failed to take action on the issue when he was an executive responsible for it.
For instance, he didn't set the privacy settings on the accounts of minors to the highest level by default. We know this because Facebook is only announcing doing this recently.
At the very least, that is a less intrusive intervention than that other one, and yet, because Facebook does that other one, that is the one he thinks is gospel.
His positions on things like end-to-end encryption would be strangely specific and tailored to whatever Facebook was willing to do at any particular time.
For instance, Facebook had already done E2EE for Whatsapp but kept delaying it for FB Messenger. He would come up with very specific arguments for why Facebook was in the right, and how FB Messenger was somehow "different". He would later forget these points after Facebook rolled E2EE out in FB Messenger.