Facebook is in trouble

Written By: - Date published: 8:24 am, March 21st, 2018 - 80 comments
Categories: Abuse of power, Donald Trump, facebook, internet, Media, uk politics, us politics, you couldn't make this shit up - Tags:

The Facebook Cambridge Analytica story is getting to a very interesting stage.  A whistleblower, Christopher Wyllie,  has confirmed that Cambridge Analytica was able to download facebook relating to 50 million Facebook users most of who had no idea theie data was being harvested. It was then used to micro target advertising, either to trigger support for the republicans through scratching prejudices or to suppress liberal turn out the vote campaigns.  Its campaign is credited by some with getting Donald Trump elected.

Here is Wyllie explaining what occurred.

This 4 News film provides a fascinating insight into CA’s modus operandii.

The links to CA and the Republican Party are strong. It was essentially Reoublican run and Republican funded.

The repercussions are snowballing. Facebook is being asked in the UK to explain how it could let this happen. From the Guardian:

MPs have summoned Mark Zuckerberg to appear before a select committee investigating fake news and accused his company of misleading them at a previous hearing.

The Facebook founder has been called to give evidence to the digital, culture, media and sport committee, following revelations over the use of its data by the election consultancy Cambridge Analytica.

The company has also come under the spotlight in the US, after an investigation by the Observer, Channel 4 News and the New York Times revealed that 50m user profiles had been accessed and harvested for data.

In a letter to Zuckerberg, the committee’s chair, Damian Collins, wrote that Facebook had been repeatedly asked about how companies acquired and held on to user data from its site, and whether data had been taken without users’ consent.

“Your officials’ answers have consistently understated this risk and have been misleading to the committee,” he wrote. “It is now time to hear from a senior Facebook executive with the sufficient authority to give an accurate account of this catastrophic failure of process … Given your commitment at the start of the new year to ‘fixing’ Facebook, I hope that this representative will be you.”

The committee said Facebook had failed to provide follow-up evidence after the last hearing, and that this week’s revelations had raised new questions for the inquiry. On Wednesday it will take evidence from a former Facebook operations manager, Sandy Parakilas.

And it is also facing an inquiry in the United States. From Radio New Zealand:

The US Federal Trade Commission is reported to be investigating Facebook after allegations 50 million users’ private information was misused by Cambridge Analytica.

Whistleblower Christopher Wylie, who helped set up the firm, has claimed it amassed the data of about 50 million users through a personality quiz on Facebook then deliver tailored material to get them to vote for Donald Trump in the 2016 US election.

Facebook is due to face the US Congress on Wednesday as pressure grows. Its stock has continued to slide, falling 3 percent on Tuesday following a 6.7 percent drop on Monday which wiped almost $37bn from its market value.

Both the British Parliament and the European Parliament have also called on Facebook boss Mark Zuckerberg to give evidence to them.

Cambridge Analytica, which is based in London, denies any wrongdoing.

The FTC, an independent agency of the US government, is tasked with protecting American consumers.

Facebook has only last week banned Cambridge Analytica from Facebook. Last week …

80 comments on “Facebook is in trouble”

  1. Ad 1

    +100 Mickey

  2. Sacha 2

    CA’s Board has thrown chief executive Nix under the bus: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-43480048

  3. Peroxide Blonde 3

    Crosby Textor spent Stg 4m of the Tories money on Cambridge Analytica in the last UK GE. It will be difficult to believe that similar antics were not on the menu then.

    Crosby Textor advises the NZ National Party.

    The National Party have to publish the detail of the tools and data that was used on their behalf in NZ.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/mar/19/electoral-commission-conservatives-spent-lost-majority-2017-election

    • Peroxide Blonde 3.1

      Delete please. I just spotted my error.

    • tracey 3.2

      So, the Tories outrage might be considered faux outrage as they paid for and benefitted from the practice?

      The National party still wants us to believe they have not grasped the basic tenets of our Privacy Act.

      First Bennett, then Collins wilfully broke this law, the former resulting in public humiliation for two women, the latter death threats for an innocent civil servant. And just this week we discover that the National Party has breached Privacy laws again by emailing people who signed their petition, seeking donations.

      It beggars belief that from their office floor to their cabinet positions (former) no one in this organisation understands the Privacy Act. This can only happen with poor processes, lack of education, disregard for the importance of privacy or thinking that if you get caught it is of no import.

      Can I just say that breaches of privacy are not “small” errors. They are BIG errors. It would help if the media, who are now all over this FB story, understood that all Privacy breaches are an erosion of rights.

      http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/national/election-2011/102380970/Petitioners-added-to-National-Partys-mailing-list-without-permission

  4. dukeofurl 5

    What an amazing insight into how the digital campaign was run by Cambridge for the politicals party , mostly likely the US republicans.

    One thing to make clear it says “amassed the data of about 50 million users through a personality quiz on Facebook ”
    The quiz was done through a Facebook 3rd party app about 750,000 users downloaded, but through each users wider circle was able to get data for 50 mill other users.

    Puts an interesting light nationals harvesting of emails from petitions ( its got plenty of these running).
    While they may have ‘accidentally’ got a direct email from national, I would think the ultimate goal is to use the emails to target them on Facebook with ‘soft ads’ for national.
    I see so many times on sites I subscribe to or use their services, the facebook logo on the sign in screen, sometimes even to ‘log in via facebook’.

  5. tsmithfield 6

    There will be a bit of hand-wringing.

    Facebook will say they are tightening up their security. Then all will be back to normal.

    At the moment, a good buying opportunity for Facebook shares.

    • tracey 6.1

      Agree. Just as yesterday the police were found (yet again) to have treated sexual allegations poorly in their investigation but we are told the culture has changed since then… yeah right. Zuckerberg’s silence on this is deafening. We really need to hold of sanctifying business people until they are dead and ALL their behaviours are in.

    • cleangreen 6.2

      I refuse to use Facebook now that we know these cretins were rigging countries elections.

      Where are NSA/FBI/CIA long drawn out investigations now I wonder??????

      • alwyn 6.2.1

        Why did you ever use Facebook in the first place?
        I have never understood anyone who enrols with Facebook and then acts surprised that they use, and sell, every single thing you place there. What on earth did you think their business model was?
        I decided, when I read their policies that I would never, ever, have anything to do with them.

        • Tracey 6.2.1.1

          Or why anyone would sign a National Party petition and be surprised when their privacy is breached 😉

          • cleangreen 6.2.1.1.1

            100% correct.

            We are all taken as pawns in a power game controlled by the digital highway now.

            I am not a user of Facebook, as i was always suspicious of the freedom of that media, after once I and my wife engaged in one event on our daughters page and afterwards we got so much stuff sent back to us afterwards.

            Stay away from facebook I say.

        • esoteric pineapples 6.2.1.2

          That’s a convenient attitude for people who aren’t inclined to use social media anyway. Social media is a fact of life and Facebook provides one important part of it. Saying people just shouldn’t use Facebook is simplistic and unrealistic. I use Facebook and have always assumed that nothing I put on there is really that private. I automatically assume, everything I put on it, along with every other bit of digital information I use from phone calls, to emails etc ends up in the NSA. I also assume governments like Turkey follow the facebook pages of people they want to spy on like the Kurds and every like I put on a post there increases my chances of not getting into Turkey. However, that doesn’t mean any of this is acceptable and Facebook should be held to account because it is one of the world’s de facto social media platforms.

          Plus in this day and age you can run but you can’t hide. People who think they are off the radar because they don’t use Facebook are just as naive as people who expect their privacy is safe on Facebook. It’s an issue of privacy and it affects everyone.

          • Incognito 6.2.1.2.1

            Well said.

          • alwyn 6.2.1.2.2

            I wasn’t really meaning that people should take it that I am claiming that I was ” Saying people just shouldn’t use Facebook”. I’m not.

            The critical part of my comment was
            “I have never understood anyone who enrols with Facebook and then acts surprised that they use, and sell, every single thing you place there.”
            That is in fact just the same thing as what you are saying when you continue with ” I use Facebook and have always assumed that nothing I put on there is really that private”.
            You don’t act as if you are surprised that it happens

            I choose not to go near Facebook but I am certainly not going to demand that everyone else should be forced to follow my example or that Facebook should be banned or State controlled.

        • Doogs 6.2.1.3

          Self righteous pomposity Alwyn!
          I do believe you could have couched your comment with less of a put-down, and still got your message across. This is the sort of condescension that is typical of people who arrive on TS intent on being critical and sometimes abusive as a first response.

      • dukeofurl 6.2.2

        Doesnt matter if you previously used facebook or never did ( like me)

        Facebook has a shadow profile on you any way, its so ubiquitous with the little ‘f logo’ indicating its watching you everywhere through its cookies. ( But not on ‘the standard’)

        I try through my brower settings to block facebook.com cookies on websites that I visit ( using global block) but for how long will that last ?

        • AsleepWhileWalking 6.2.2.1

          If you are concerned you can pay for software such as Cryptohippy.

        • cleangreen 6.2.2.2

          Thanks for that dukeofurl,

          I will pass that on to my family members that still use facebook.

          Quote;
          “Doesn’t matter if you previously used facebook or never did ( like me)
          Facebook has a shadow profile on you any way, its so ubiquitous with the little ‘f logo’ indicating its watching you everywhere through its cookies. ( But not on ‘the standard’)
          I try through my browser settings to block facebook.com cookies on websites that I visit ( using global block) but for how long will that last ?”

        • alwyn 6.2.2.3

          I certainly didn’t know that.

      • Wensleydale 6.2.3

        You can use Facebook, just so long as you ensure everything on your page is 100% imaginary. I sign up to sites all over the internet using fictional information because, for the most part, they really don’t need to know anything about me, and it’s really none of their business. There are exceptions obviously — sites involving financial transactions for example, but as a general rule… make stuff up. If they want to profit from someone’s data, they can profit from data belonging to Jasper Dribblewizard or Marjorie Saucepan. Anyone can be an 87-year-old spinster with chronic arthritis and an obese cat living in New Jersey if they really want to be.

        • Thinkerr 6.2.3.1

          Just like The Beatles did on the Sergeant Pepper album…

        • alwyn 6.2.3.2

          You remind me of the old days when the DomPost used to have a cryptic crossword competition. Your best chance of winning was on your very first attempt as the person picking the winners used to pick out new entrants to give the pens to.
          I remember getting pens with entries of “Alberius Aardvark”, “Victor Viking”, “Jaspar Feline” (the family cat) “Theodore Ursine” (grandson’s teddy bear) and a few others. Everyone did the same I think.

  6. Colonial Viper 7

    1) Cambridge Analytica and Palantir operate in this same business area.

    2) The Democrats used Face Book in approximately the same way – to suck massive amounts of user data down – as revealed by Obama’s former campaign director of integration and social media analytics Carol Davidsen. She said that Face Book admitted that they allowed the Democratic campaign to do things that they wouldn’t anyone else – because they were supportive of Barack Obama.

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-19/obamas-former-campaign-director-makes-bombshell-facebook-claim-they-were-our-side

    3) Sucking down and selling massive amounts of user data is of course what Face Book was designed for and why app developers flock to the platform. In fact it was “shockingly routine.” The “Friends Permission” feature allowed your Face Book friends to OK the exposure of all your data. Which made Face Book a lot of money. In short, it was like giving all your neighbours a set of keys to your house and car.

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-20/former-facebook-employee-says-cambridge-analytica-style-data-harvesting-was

    Anyone who has followed the revelations of William Binnie, Edward Snowden, Kim Dotcom, etc will not have been surprised at any of this.

    • RedLogix 7.1

      My sentiments exactly. However it’s not exactly clear what the right solution is; all the cures I can think of may well be worse than the problem.

      The only thing I can think of is to minimise my personal exposure as much as is reasonable, but even that may not suffice.

      Based on some solid science, it’s pretty trivial to make quite good predictions about how you’re likely to vote based on fairly elementary analysis of personality and interests. Most people are pretty fixed in their voting patterns; it’s the persuadable ones they’ll be looking to influence.

    • Siobhan 7.2

      Exactly.

      End of conversation really.

    • cleangreen 7.3

      I refuse to use Facebook now that we know these cretins were rigging countries elections.

      Where are NSA/FBI/CIA long drawn out investigations now I wonder??????

      • dukeofurl 7.3.1

        Go one better , use your browing settings to BLOCK facebook cookies – they will be ‘shadowing you’ even if you arent a registered user.

  7. Bill 8

    Anyone thinking to revisit opinions about China having banned Facebook solely off the back of anti-democratic sentiments?

    Maybe the Chinese state had reasons enough to consider Facebook “dangerous” for Chinese citizens?

    And no, before the numpties come out to play, that’s just a question borne of curiosity and not some defense of or cheer-leading for the Chinese government and/or their “Great Firewall of China”.

    • xanthe 8.1

      thats a fair question Bill. probably a bit of bit of both

    • weka 8.2

      If you have some evidence that the Chinese govt thought FB was dangerous for Chinese citizens a la privacy issues or election influencing, then I’d love to see it.

      • JohnSelway 8.2.1

        Pretty sure the reason was the Chinese government couldn’t fully monitor or control Facebook

      • Bill 8.2.2

        The “dangerous” for Chinese citizens is simply the official Chinese line (as far as I can ascertain).

        The “anti-democratic” is the general line peddled in the west.

        Given the (how to say?) “unhealthy” impact of Facebook on western consumers (as per this post and a slue of recent headlining and or long articles including “facebook rots your brain” type stuff from ex-programmers), it seems perfectly reasonable to ask whether Chinese officials considered the supposed recent “revelations” about Facebook’s negative connotations when deciding to block it.

        • weka 8.2.2.1

          yes it is reasonable to ask that, and it’s also reasonable to ask if there is any evidence to support that supposition.

          When the Chinese govt say that something is dangerous for their citizens, I trust them as much as I trust most other govts. They’re going to frame things in the way that best justifies them controlling things the way they want to control them. Like other govts they’re not wholly bad, so sure, maybe FB being an ethical clusterfuck was part of their decision making, but I think it’s worth understanding that in the context of their motivations for control as well. Also, within the context of Chinese cultural world views (i.e. what they do makes more sense when looked at from their points of view).

    • McFlock 8.3

      I suppose the key to that question would be whether the FB alternatives available in China such as Wechat and Weibo less “dangerous” to users than FB.

      They all seem about the same to me, although Wechat being used for real-life transaction payments possibly makes it more dangerous – piss someone off, and a “service outage” means you suddenly can’t buy that train ticket or food.

      • adam 8.3.1

        Isn’t all the same if the information your shearing on social media can be mined. My guess is China just didn’t want the west Mining it’s citizens, when they are their citizens to data mine, and hold information on.

        Wechat, is not used by activists within China – to paraphrase a friend of mine – “Too bloody dangerous, the party’s all over it.”

        • Anne 8.3.1.1

          My guess is China just didn’t want the west Mining it’s citizens, when they are their citizens to data mine, and hold information on.

          Sounds like a reasonable assumption to make. A cynical observation, but when most 1st world countries are probably doing it to one degree or another I guess its OK if they want sole rights to mine their own people.

          Thank goodness I avoided the trap of Facebook for suspicions similar to what we now know has actually happened.

  8. Draco T Bastard 9

    falling 3 percent on Tuesday following a 6.7 percent drop on Monday which wiped almost $37bn from its market value.

    Which just proves how fake its value is.

  9. One Two 10

    FB was designed for information gathering…

    Information which can be used in unlimited ways to achieve whichever outcome…

    The surveillance state is what these digital tools were designed for and quite likely by…as a key stakeholder as a minimum…

    Viewing FB as political misses the mark…

  10. The Fairy Godmother 11

    They are quite ridiculous. They go ballistic at pictures of women breastfeeding and the new zealand based page dance with me in the heart was nearly taken down because it featured a painting – not a photo – of naked children playing in the water. Then they allow this nefarious stuff.

  11. Bill 12

    Just read a piece reporting that Trump’s campaign didn’t actually use the data collected by Cambridge Analytica because it wasn’t “as current or as effective as the RNC’s data and Facebook’s advertising platform.”

    Apparently…

    “Basically, the Trump campaign hired Cambridge Analytica as a fallback as it was unsure it would able to use the Republican National Committee data, which in turn, Trump’s campaign did use—and found, together with Facebook’s platform, that it was more effective.”

    The above is from this article.

    And I guess it would be appropriate to throw in this link again – where Facebook big-note themselves for apparently having electoral influence. (Link and surrounding context from this article)

  12. Bill 13

    Also this from a link in one of the above articles…from December 2015

    Ted Cruz’s presidential campaign is using psychological data based on research spanning tens of millions of Facebook users, harvested largely without their permission, to boost his surging White House run and gain an edge over Donald Trump and other Republican rivals, the Guardian can reveal.

    The entire Guardian piece is worth the read.

  13. Obtrectator 14

    My spouse and I are (and will remain) Facebook holdouts until the day dawns when you can’t do anything unless you have an account with them. And even then we’ll probably go off-line rather than submit.

    F*ck the Zuck.

  14. Tuppence Shrewsbury 15

    Lol remember when Obama won cos Facebook and it was the lefts great low rent hope here as they were broke?

    • cleangreen 15.1

      Boycott Facebook folks now.

    • Barfly 15.2

      No

    • weka 15.3

      “Lol remember when Obama won cos Facebook and it was the lefts great low rent hope here as they were broke?”

      I also don’t remember that, but do enlighten us how Obama won because of what this post is about, rather than say just using social media smartly. Or maybe you are arguing that there is no problem with what FB and CA have done and we should just let them get on with it.

  15. Philg 16

    So we are giving away our privacy and democruptcy for what exactly?

    • tc 16.1

      Those fancy devices that nobody seems to be able to do without.

      It’s becoming a clear choice between which handler do you prefer Google’s android or Apple in the smartphone world.

      Then there’s all that cloud data you effectively signed over by agreeing to the T&C’s.

    • adam 16.2

      The freedom to shut up, and do as you are told!

      • weka 16.2.1

        The irony there is that FB have been enabled with extraordinary freedom.

        • alwyn 16.2.1.1

          Have you ever read through the Terms and Conditions that you have agreed to when you use these products?
          If you were to print any of them out you would have hundreds of pages of bumf. If you agree to them you are forfeiting all rights to the material you put there.

          • weka 16.2.1.1.1

            I gave up reading T/Cs a long time ago and largely rely on people who do read them to raise issues of importance. None of what is happening with FB right now is a surprise to me, although I wasn’t familiar with the specifics.

            • alwyn 16.2.1.1.1.1

              “I gave up reading T/Cs a long time ago”.
              So did I and so does everyone else. Life is too short.
              That is what they rely on. Not just Facebook, although they are probably the worst.

              • tc

                Eddie Izzard had a piece in his routine where apple come for your first born a la King Herod…..it was in the T&C’s.

                • alwyn

                  I have heard people claim that such clauses have been inserted in the T&Cs by some bored individual writing them.
                  I’ve never seen one though. Mostly of course because I’ve given up reading them. Wait, there is a knock at the door. Some old fellow with a scythe. Nooooooooooooooo

                • joe90

                  Yeah, look at what happened to Kyle Broflovski after signing Apple’s T&C agreement without reading it.

            • Carolyn_Nth 16.2.1.1.1.2

              I understand that the new EU data protection guidelines address that. The aim is to end the kind of endless unread pages of T and Cs that are on these big sites. Site owners are being asked to make brief clear statements. Can’t remember how it’s worded.

  16. adam 17

    Did anyone notice in all this, the casual racism from Cambridge Analytica? We don’t have any dealing with Russia, nor do we have any Russian staff.

    My guess today we will see it all connected to Russia. Because in an interconnected world, anyone can make these connections. So again we are back to Russian Phobia.

    All the time ignoring this is a foreign country, England, interfering in USA election.

  17. savenz 18

    Scary stuff.

    It also shows that political parties are not being careful enough in their choice of candidates.

    Look at the cosy club that the world leaders seem to have. For example Obama is democrat but Key is National but they both seem to believe in the same ideas.

    Around a golf game, deals are being done, troops being sent off, examples, aka Dotcom made of to help economic interests of donors.

    Jacinda is no 1, because she believes in free trade which helps a lot of wealthy people get more wealth.

    Ideas via propaganda spread from sources like Cambridge Analytics have targeted influential men and women to make everyone believe the same vision even though it is not true.

    It is even more revealing that the whole Cambridge was in itself a fiction to get billionaire funding to make them seem more intellectual and in tune with culture.

    A London base start up, looking for cash, did not fit that profile.

    Everything these days seems to be a manipulation to acquire money and power at the expense of others.

    Globalism and free trade agreements for example are being made out to be some sort of saviour, in spite of what the results are and the internal division of countries it is making. Apparently oil exploration actually helps the environment.. Trump helps the poor. Obama helped the poor. Key helped the poor.

    When there becomes little difference in democratic ideas, it then paves the way for more open division such as Trump. Trump only happened because the democrats pretended that globalism was perfect and working for all.

    Clearly it works out better if you can get around the world in private jets and attend fundraising parties in New York or golf games in NZ, than those without a job in Auckland or Detroit.

    Or you get a job as a NZ First and Labour MP, but then next day, decide what you campaigned on was wrong and global capitalism via free trade agreements is always a good thing even if it’s a “7 out of 10”

    Hey why bother making it a 10, be lazy and keep the 7 like Labour and NZ First, there are lunches and dinners to speak at.

    Ban oil because that’s a bit easier than to go against the Cambridge Analytics propaganda fed by MSM about how great Globalism is for all. (Especially the 0.01%)

    Also notice that with the idea of the only taxes are ‘capital gains taxes’. If you are rich you can avoid capital gains taxes. If you want to tax the flow of money you need to actually do transaction taxes because increasingly wealth is made out of policy, paper and thin air not real assets and you can be rich but post losses and avoid taxes. Corporations have been doing it for years, but still the politicians turn a blind eye. I wonder why.

    • One Two 18.1

      The masses are being played like the proverbial fiddle..

      Not many years ago the catch cry would have been ‘conspiracy’….in the MSM, on blogs such as this…

      Now it’s ‘normal’…

      To those who were calling out against social media, the surveillance state and the ‘intelligence agencies’…

      They were right…so what happens now that it’s out in the open…

      Little of nothing…the people are hooked up on junk…

      Where is it taking our species, and the inhabitants of the planet…

      The digital age is a trap, a dead end death trap…

  18. patricia bremner 19

    “Man’s inhumanity to man knows no bounds’ Robert Burns.

    • tc 19.1

      Noted alot in sci fi as the major reason we are a doomed species.

      We can’t rise above fighting amongst ourselves to save this planet or find another as we’ll never develop the tech in time to do so.

  19. AsleepWhileWalking 20

    And as I predicted the FTC is onto them.

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/world/352989/us-watchdog-investigates-cambridge-analytica-facebook

    Those FTC fuckers are naaasty. Just ask Frank Kern.

  20. Descendant Of Sssmith 21

    All watched Over By Machines Of Loving Grace some years ago lamented on the rise of Silicon Valley and it’s Randian adherents.

    Set of three documentaries:

    https://topdocumentaryfilms.com/all-watched-over-by-machines-of-loving-grace/

    Treating and manipulating society as a computer network was part of the theme.

  21. Thinkerr 22

    Guess they’ll have to call it “Two-Faced-Book” from now on…

    (Ka-thump)

  22. Cinny 23

    Dang, just catching up watching/reading all the links.

    Big up’s to Chris Wylie for coming forward, psychological warfare/manipulation on a massive scale.

    The moves of conmen, the labels and categorisations Chris Wylie uses to describe procedures and practices, wonder who taught him his craft; clever, intelligent, greedy individuals.

    Has Chris Wylie been ridiculed and targeted yet like Ed Snowden was? Or our own Nicky Hager for that matter. It’s too shocking, must not be true… yeah right sure lololz

    • Carolyn_Nth 23.1

      It may be too soon for a massive turn against Wylie – most news media are just transfixed by the story. Of course, news media like it when social media takes a hit. They’ve generally felt the likes of FB have been enabling their news to be circulated without the news sites getting the hits. And then FB gets the advertising kudos.

      But FB has deleted Wylie, which has impacted his use of other sites.

      cnet news reports:

      After he turned whistleblower, he was abruptly booted from Facebook’s services.

      “This is the power Facebook has,” Wylie said Tuesday during an onstage interview at the Front Club in London. “They can delete you from the internet.”

      Facebook is so ingrained in our modern online experience, Wylie said, that his suspension from the social network has had a ripple effect.

      “I know this sounds ridiculous,” he said. “I can’t use Tinder now, for example — because you have to validate yourself with fucking Facebook.” (One of the most popular ways to log in to Tinder is to link it to your Facebook account, however it’s now possible to sign in using your phone number.)

      Facebook, for its part, said Wylie was suspended because he violated the company’s terms of service.

      • Cinny 23.1.1

        Thanks for that Carolyn, so much control that entity appears to have, dirty old FB.

        I see Cambridge Analytical are tied up to UAE interests and had a part to play in the anti-Qatar campaign in the Middle East. Also that much of their intelligence comes via Israel, apparently the Israelis are very practised in gathering info lololollllooool. It’s like a movie script from a spy thriller.
        Also appears they are a bit anti Russia, maybe a chemical attack on a Russian double agent, spin a narrative via the social media, job done? Far out anything is possible.

  23. Sparky 24

    Amazing how we are always hearing about the Republicans but hardly a word about the dirt attached to the Dems.

    I would very much doubt too that data gathering is limited to any one political party.

    https://inc42.com/buzz/cambridge-analytica-big-data-opposition/

    • joe90 24.1

      Yeah, but this time there’s something different going on. A bunch of shady AF US billionaires got themselves an offshore company to engage in deeply unethical behaviors that go way beyond, Ukrainian honey traps, traditional ratfucking.

      CA got itself arsed from FB and video of their executives boasting about their dirty tricks caused a $50 billion Facebook share crash, and the flow-on saw the US stock market shed billions.

      And even though there’s more to come on that front, the real damage is the undermining of voters confidence in not only the information and news they receive, but in the openness and honesty of the electoral process, and the integrity of their democracy.

    • Tricledrown 25.1

      Facebook tax dodging political gerrymandering data stealing monopoly.
      Could be the beginning of the end of their dominance.
      What gets me is their app has got hugely data storage hungry .
      FB continually requires upgrades which have made their app so large that it uses up so much data that I wouldn’t be surprised if they are getting tax free kick backs from ISPs.

  24. Ad 26

    No apology from The Zuck this morning.

    A minor road-bump to controlling the entire English language and human discourse.

    • joe90 26.1

      No apology….

      Mark Zuckerberg
      3 hrs · Menlo Park, CA, United States ·

      I want to share an update on the Cambridge Analytica situation — including the steps we’ve already taken and our next steps to address this important issue.

      We have a responsibility to protect your data, and if we can’t then we don’t deserve to serve you. I’ve been working to understand exactly what happened and how to make sure this doesn’t happen again. The good news is that the most important actions to prevent this from happening again today we have already taken years ago. But we also made mistakes, there’s more to do, and we need to step up and do it.

      Here’s a timeline of the events:

      …but Sher does a deeply regret….

      Sheryl Sandberg shared Mark Zuckerberg’s post.
      2 hrs ·

      Sharing Mark’s post addressing the Cambridge Analytica news. As he said, we know that this was a major violation of people’s trust, and I deeply regret that we didn’t do enough to deal with it. We have a responsibility to protect your data – and if we can’t, then we don’t deserve to serve you.

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Swiss tax agreement tightens net
    Opportunities to dodge tax are shrinking with the completion of a new tax agreement with Switzerland, Revenue Minister Stuart Nash announced today. Mr Nash and the Swiss Ambassador David Vogelsanger have today signed documents to update the double tax agreement (DTA). The previous DTA was signed in 1980. “Double tax ...
    2 weeks ago