Jason Grosse on the Ever Increasing Importance of Policy Comms

Mixing Board Studio Session

Jason Grosse is currently a Global Communications Director at TikTok where he leads their privacy efforts. As global lead, he spearheads policy communications initiatives, crafting clear and compelling messaging to engage stakeholders, government officials, and the public, resulting in effective advocacy efforts and successful policy outcomes. Before that he was the Policy Communications Manager at Meta. Previous experience as the Director, Corporate & Executive Communications at Juniper Networks and Media Relations at SAP. 

In this Studio Session, Jason and Mixing Board Founder Sean Garrett talk about working at a company that everyone has a (strongly held) opinion about, familiarizing yourself with a product before solidifying your opinion on it,  focusing on the good, and why words matter.

SG: Tell me what you're up to now and how you got into this job?

JG: I'm currently a member of the Global Communications team at TikTok where I lead all things privacy communications. My first intro to policy communications was at Facebook. Prior to that I had never done it and decided to take a role there for a new challenge. It’s a never ending learning curve and very interesting space.

SG: Your history is interesting because the first half of your career is fairly “normcore tech”. Then you go to Meta and dig into the privacy world at an interesting moment in time. Now you're at TikTok and at an interesting moment in time. Tell me about those transitions.

JG: In the first half of my career, working at companies like SAP and Juniper gave me a solid foundation in understanding complex, mission-critical technology. They were incredible places to dive into the intricacies of established systems and to learn from companies that have built lasting success. But when Meta came knocking, it was a pivotal moment—this was one of the most dynamic companies in the tech world, and I’d moved to Silicon Valley from Toronto precisely to be part of that energy and innovation. It felt like the chance to be at the forefront of something that was shaping not only the tech industry but society as a whole.

The decision to join Meta wasn’t difficult; I knew that if I turned it down, I’d always wonder ‘what if?’ That role gave me an insider’s view into the privacy landscape at a crucial moment. And now, at TikTok, I’m in another fascinating and fast-evolving environment, where the challenges and opportunities are as impactful as they are unique. Each transition has been about stepping into spaces where technology intersects with people’s everyday lives in significant ways—and that’s what keeps me coming back.

SG: As you get there and you're figuring this place out and obviously under this microscope – and you're also of the company that's moving you even closer to the fire, what surprised you about that? What did you see?

JG: At that time, the level of attention on Meta was like nothing I'd experienced before. In communications, you often put a lot of effort into pitching stories that may not get traction, but at Meta, there was an inherent interest in everything we did. It was eye-opening to work in an environment where nearly any pitch sparked engagement. This experience really underscored for me the importance of precision in communications. I came to understand deeply that every word counts – the language we use in statements, blog posts, and other public materials can reappear in ways you don’t always anticipate, from news coverage to regulatory scrutiny. Now, at TikTok, that responsibility feels even more significant.

SG: On the things that you felt were unfair or untrue, how did that change your perspective on communications?

JG: I’m definitely a little bit jaded at times. When you read so much that’s just not true – you can do the firefighting, of, “we're just going to correct the record all day every day, seven days a week.” But at some fundamental level you have to ask, why is this being written when you know it’s not true. That part can be a bit tough to deal with, but I generally try to stay away from the wholesale idea that “media is bad.” 

If you see some of the larger stories that I worked on, a good example is the work I did around facial recognition – I always sought reporters who would at least treat the company fairly. When you're as successful as a Meta or a TikTok, you should be the subject of scrutiny. But you should also have a fair opportunity to explain the changes you're making or your side of the story. 

SG: You were working across tech teams within Meta and now within TikTok with folks who are reading the same things. They're feeling personal about this because this is their baby, they developed it. One of the harder parts about our jobs can be the management of internal constituencies who tend to have very strong opinions about the area of work that you're doing. How did you have to balance between them and external audiences?

JG: With internal stakeholders  it's about expectation management. There are some things that comms folks know, you'll just know that this update will blow it out of the water and you’re going to make news. When you're more senior those things are very obvious to you. Earlier on you think everything's going to blow it out of the water. That changes as time goes along, and then you manage expectations.

Take something like a privacy feature update: for the internal teams, especially the Product Manager who led the work, it can feel like a major milestone—a groundbreaking achievement for the app. But externally, we have to consider it within the broader industry landscape. Are we just catching up to peers, are we setting a new standard, or are we somewhere in between? I always try to zoom out and help paint that larger picture. For instance, I might say, 'Snap already implemented this,' or, 'Meta’s had a similar feature for years.' At TikTok, it can be a bit different since it’s a younger platform, so there are nuances to that comparison. But ultimately, in this space, we have to manage expectations; real innovation is hard, and we’re rarely going to get immediate praise for simply keeping up with privacy norms. 

SG: Policy communications has long been one of those disciplines where the people who do it preach its importance, and the response is along the lines of: "Yeah, whatever." Yet, when there is a policy matter to react to, it’s:  "Oh my God, you're right." Meta has been very forward on policy, writ large, for a long time. For TikTok, it was probably an area that has to be given some global complexities, but also probably not natural to the company. As someone who has this role, how are you explaining internally what policy communications even is, and its impact? And why it has to be this important layer of communications as you talk about these products and updates?

JG: One of the unique aspects of policy communications is that, when it’s done effectively, the result can often look like ‘nothing happened’—and that’s a success in itself. It’s challenging to point to a blank slate and say, ‘Look, we prevented misunderstandings, we avoided regulatory friction, we built trust.’ But that’s what makes policy comms so crucial, even if its value isn’t always immediately visible.

When media, regulators, or lawmakers start raising questions, the need for well-crafted, proactive messaging becomes very clear. It’s about protecting the company’s reputation, clarifying our practices, and managing potential risks before they escalate. But the real art of policy communications is in those quieter moments in between, where the goal is to ensure our messages around complex issues—privacy, data security, AI ethics—are consistently present and understood.

At TikTok, this is particularly significant given our global audience and the unique geopolitical context. Internally, I emphasize that policy communications isn’t just a reactive measure; it’s an essential layer of our storytelling and trust-building with users, regulators, and stakeholders worldwide. Our work gives the company a voice in shaping narratives proactively rather than just responding to them. And as the industry evolves, the importance of being thoughtful, transparent, and strategic in our approach only grows.

SG: When tech policy communications first started as a thing in the late ‘90s and early 2000s, it was almost a theoretical exercise projected at setting up a future state. Tech was yet to impact humans on a day-to-day basis in places all over the country that had a Congress person or a Senator willing to listen to them. Then technology became integrated into the fabric of people's lives pretty quickly. And the reality is, tech won.

And, to the winners go the spoils but also the toils. And at some point, we have to be responsible because so many people are using this stuff. That's the job of the policy comms person, to be that conscious for that. What have you seen over time?

JG: When you think about the role of a policy comms person, a lot of things fall into that bucket, especially these days. When you look at elections, misinfo, disinfo, hate speech of all kinds, privacy, and data security, trust and safety – all of these subjects usually fall within the purview of a policy comms team. What communications people are doing in those roles is messaging the company's stance on those things. If you look at my current employer and what I work on, there's a lot around privacy and data security and access, data flows, cross-border data flows. 

As these apps grow and become even more intertwined in our lives, I can't think of a more important area for a company to focus on. Product people would argue and say, "At the end of the day, we build a product and we ship it." But these are the things that surround that when you're building and shipping products. If you don't get this right, then it may become extremely difficult for you to sell your product or sell ads or however it is you make your money.

SG: What you say back is, "Well, if we're really good at that, we're going to have a big impact on human beings." Most of the time that impact is going to be really awesome, fun, cool, or interesting, but sometimes that impact may be complicated. 

JG: Yes, with the good impact, comes the bad. On these platforms, we establish guardrails with trust and safety, community guidelines  or privacy practices. But what happens on the platform is done by people. The good and the bad that come with these platforms and getting that right is a delicate balance. Especially without over-engineering, over monitoring, or over moderating speech and activity on the platforms.

SG: Your current company and your last company are incredibly popular products and used by many, many millions of people. But in certain circles they can be polarizing. What is it like to work for an organization where people have feelings and they're very strongly held?

JG: I will go to great lengths not to tell you I work for TikTok. Because you know the reaction you're going to get. You're going to get a lot of opinions on all of the things you read in the media. It was the same at Meta. When I started at SAP, maybe people didn’t like the systems, but it's not at all the same. To go into a place where people really care, and they actually don't like the company, that was difficult at first.

Now, it rolls off my back. People can say, "Well, your company is engaging in this practice," and I just know it not to be true. And if you know what’s true, then you just have to keep believing in the principles. TikTok, for example, is doing mostly good in the world. And I say mostly because with every platform that has hundreds of millions of people using it, there's going to be some bad. That's unavoidable and true of all the platforms from TikTok to Instagram, X, Reddit, Snap and whatever emerges in the future. At TikTok the mission of the company is to inspire joy and that’s still happening. When I was at Meta, it was again, overwhelmingly good. I knew that. And I knew that some of the things the company was accused of doing were not true. 

SG: Regardless of where things are true or not, you're still going to be a political football. That obviously has big implications when you're doing policy communications.

JG: When so many people use the platform, some level of oversight or regulation is necessary. There's hundreds of millions of people using this platform, of course that comes with the territory. The companies rightfully should be subject to some level of scrutiny by the media and regulators. That makes perfect sense.

SG: When I was working at Twitter in the early days, we started the policy function and  probably more than 50% of interactions with policy makers were along the lines of: "How do I do this?" or “Can you give me special access to this thing?" Once policymakers started using it, it became less scary. It’s not just some thing you’ve heard about, it's a thing that you use. At TikTok, what's the balance between, policy user support versus policy communications? Is it helpful when people actually use the product to get a better sense of what the truth is?

JG: Using it, that's huge. It would be great if more regulators, politicians were to use the platform. A lot of lawmakers are probably on Facebook or Instagram. But a lot of them probably don't use Snap or TikTok. There is a gap between, I just don't know the product, so therefore I'll just believe it's bad without even using it. Having more people engage with it would be great, education that way would be awesome. It would go a long way in demystifying and reducing the scare factor around the app. I do think we’re slowly starting to see this change.

SG: How have you seen the conversation about privacy evolve since you started focusing on it? Is it something that will always require a deep focus? Or are we just in a period now where these issues are particularly acute?

JG: There's a baseline that all apps have established, in terms of privacy settings. You can go public or private, you can control who can reach out to you, control your DMs. We've all done that now. What you see now is just a host of laws coming online, both at the state level and the federal level – and even looking at the UK and European Union – there's a lot of laws around how you can access data, what you can do with it, who else can access it, where you store it, where does it flow. We'll continue to see more of that as time goes on. And we’ll see more regulation intended to protect younger users on the platform. 

SG: What about policy communications do you enjoy? It’s not easy work and you're dealing with a lot of stuff. What about this stuff makes you want to do it more?

JG: What I love about policy communications is the unique mix of depth, complexity, and impact. It’s the chance to go beyond surface-level understanding and really dive into the intricacies of technology and its societal implications. For example, when I was working on facial recognition, I didn’t just learn about the feature; I explored the history and motivations behind it, the ethical considerations, and how it evolved to meet public expectations. That depth is fascinating to me.

Policy communications also puts you at the intersection of technology and society—you’re often the bridge between the product team’s vision and the public’s concerns. At TikTok, for instance, I’m diving into how the company approaches AI and privacy. I get to unpack complex subjects and help make them relatable and transparent, even as we work in a fast-paced, global environment.

The stakes are high in policy, and it requires a balance of strategic thinking, empathy, and resilience. It’s challenging, yes, but there’s excitement in tackling issues that are both socially relevant and often misunderstood. For me, policy work is as rewarding as it is demanding, and that’s what keeps me engaged.

SG: For someone who really wants to get into tech policy communications, how should they start out?

JG: This isn't true for me, but a lot of  people I saw at Meta and then now at TikTok had some sort of political experience. That's a huge door opener. I didn't have it. There's two sides to policy. You can go, "I'd have this political experience," Or you can say, "Give me a tech. I'll go really deep and I'll be able to explain exactly how it works and how we should message our policies around it. There's two sides of it, but the most well-taken path is via some sort of political experience.

Interested in learning more about how to engage with the Mixing Board community of comms and brand marketing experts? Curious on how to become a member? Feel free to reach out via the “Get in Touch” button on our site.