Facebook Under Pressure as EU, US Urge Probes of Data Practices (reuters.com)

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg faced calls on Monday from U.S. and European lawmakers to explain how a consultancy that worked on President Donald Trump's election campaign gained access to data on 50 million Facebook users. From a report: Facebook's shares fell more than 7 percent, wiping around $40 billion off its market value, set for their biggest drop since September 2012, as investors worried that new legislation could damage the company's lucrative advertising business. "The lid is being opened on the black box of Facebook's data practices, and the picture is not pretty," said Frank Pasquale, a University of Maryland law professor who has written about Silicon Valley's use of data. Lawmakers in the United States, Britain and Europe have called for investigations into media reports that political analytics firm Cambridge Analytica had harvested the private data on more than 50 million Facebook users to support Trump's 2016 presidential election campaign. Further reading: An undercover investigation by Channel 4 News reveals how Cambridge Analytica secretly campaigns in elections across the world. Bosses were filmed talking about using bribes, ex-spies, fake IDs and sex workers.

Comments

DUH

[sit1963nz]

What did anyone think Facebook was ? Its a MASSIVE data gathering/mining platform that will sell that information to whom ever offers them enough money.

Re: DUH

[Anonymous Coward]

The Obama campaign bragged about doing the same thing - back in 2012

Re: DUH

[Anonymous Coward]

citation needed.

Re: DUH

[Train0987]

https://ijr.com/2018/03/107708...

Re: DUH

[Train0987]

"In a Sunday tweet thread, Carol Davidson, former director of integration and media analytics for Obama for America, said the 2012 campaign led Facebook to “suck out the whole social graph” and target potential voters. They would then use that data to do things like append their email lists.

When Facebook found out what they were doing, they were “surprised,” she said. But she also claimed they didn’t stop them once they found out" https://ijr.com/2018/03/107708...

Re: DUH

[Train0987]

And these:

https://www.cnn.com/2012/11/07...

https://www.technologyreview.c...

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

http://swampland.time.com/2012...

They BRAGGED about doing the same things (and worse) than what they're accusing Cambridge of doing.

Re:DUH

[Anonymous Coward]

if only there was some kind of government regulation! Ooops Republicans don't care!

Re:DUH

[SirGarlon]

There are many people who just want to use technology and are actively disinterested in how it works. I call this "willful ignorance." They lack the background to see how data mining could be a problem. As long as most of our legislators and regulators remain willfully ignorant, there will be no meaningful safeguards on privacy.

It's sleazy to frame this is "here is how Trump cheated at the election" because AFAIK anyone could have and would have done the same thing. But if that's what it takes to get politicians to think about privacy, bring on the sleaze.

Re:DUH

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a big difference between something that's obvious and something we have proof of.

Re: DUH

[greenwow]

True, and the media praised him for his tech savvy, but Trump did the same for the wrong reasons.

Re: DUH

[jellomizer]

It was bragged, because it was used to get people excited about the candidate, and have them go out and vote for him.

What this was using the data to find people insecurities, and setup information to hate the other guy, and have people not vote, or be so polarized that they will be afraid to choose the lesser evil.

Like all technology there are lines to be crossed, because you can use technology for good or bad.

In this election, I didn't find too many people who were wild for Trump, but they just hated Hillary more. And in many coverage when asked why they hate Clinton, they sometimes pointed to a fake news article they read on Facebook.

Re: DUH

[Anonymous Coward]

Just because Obama's campaign director said it was true, doesn't make it true.

Re: DUH

[Anonymous Coward]

Hillary locked Bernie out from the DNC's platform, too.

To be fair about any statement regarding Hillary, the DNC, and Bernie: Bernie Sanders is a self-professed socialist who broke from the Democratic Party and ran as an Independent in the U.S. Senate. Hillary is a life-long, loyal Democrat. Of course the DNC is going to back Hillary over Bernie. Maybe the extent of the backstabbing was or was not warranted, but it is easy to explain why.

They're not against collecting user data, they just want to be in control of it.

This is true of any group of people in a position of power. As long as we do it, it is legal. Anyone else does it, go to fucking prison!

Re: DUH

[Train0987]

I haven't searched yet but I seem to remember Slashdot even praising Obama's data analytics which did far more than what they are criticizing Cambridge for doing.

Re: DUH

[Anonymous Coward]

It's only wrong when you lose?

Good to see Obama getting tarred and feathered here as well.

Re: DUH

[Train0987]

Well that search didn't take long...

Behold, "The Data Crunching Prowess of Barack Obama"
https://politics.slashdot.org/...

Re: DUH

[Train0987]

Are you familiar with the efforts of David Brock's many organizations whose sole purpose was to astroturf the comments sections of all online news sites to shovel sleaze on anything Republican?

Re: DUH

[wizbang95]

Golden Post, thanks for this

Re: DUH

[Train0987]

It's amazing how quickly a post with a bunch of links gets modded to oblivion with "Informative" as the tag.

Re: DUH

[Anonymous Coward]

Huh. In Eastern Oregon there are alot of diehard Trumpets. I have avoided too many conversations with them - survival is key - but the few that I did engage were largely un/underinformed about the issues, the problems, or why Trump's history would indicate that he of all people could not be trusted (for anything. At all).

Examples? A friend with a pretty nasty preexisting condition not understanding that Obamacare and the ACA were the same thing. Another who thought that putting lobbiests in positions of power was the best way to protect consumers.

This is consistent.

And to me it's baffling because these are otherwise intelligent people; I have no idea how they can be so willing to buy the bullshit...and persist in believing it in the face of the evidence.

It really just makes me want to let the world burn, it really does.

lol - captcha: winner

Re: DUH

[Anonymous Coward]

Good to see Obama getting tarred and feathered here as well.

Nah, all the factual posts are already being downmodded by M-Smash and the rest of the infinte karma employee moderators. If they can't find some useful and almost convincing pro-tyranny posts to mod up to +5 and keep them there, we can expect this story to disappear shortly and a re-write to show up tomorrow.

Re: DUH

[Anonymous Coward]

It only appeared fake because it was so outrageous.

The news is true, Hillary is still terrible, and the Clintons in general are corrupt.

Re: DUH

[PopeRatzo]

They BRAGGED about doing the same things (and worse) than what they're accusing Cambridge of doing.

There's at least one big difference (besides the biggest difference which is that what the Obama data team did was nothing like what Trump's Cambridge Analytica team did, but let's put that aside for now). The people who were on Obama's data team were American citizens or were authorized to work in the US. Cambridge Analytica had a team made up primarily of foreign nationals who did not have US visas, green cards or work permits.

And, there is a law against that. Foreign nationals without green cards cannot work on US election campaigns even if they are volunteers.

https://www.fec.gov/updates/fo...

https://www.theguardian.com/uk...

Re: DUH

[Train0987]

Nonsense, Facebook opened up their entire data sphere to the Obama campaign and then hired a bunch of Obama's analytics people after the 2012 election in order to sell those services to other politicians.

If foreign nationals are prevented from working on campaigns then how did the Clinton Campaign get away with hiring a British spy to do opposition research?

Do you honestly believe that no illegal immigrants campaigned for Obama and Clinton? Are you really suggesting that with a straight face? That no "Dreamer" volunteered at phone banks, etc?

Re: DUH

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean Mike Cernovich?

Re: DUH

[Anonymous Coward]

There are no walls here.

Re: DUH

[Anonymous Coward]

Nonsense, Facebook opened up their entire data sphere to the Obama campaign and then hired a bunch of Obama's analytics people after the 2012 election in order to sell those services to other politicians.

If foreign nationals are prevented from working on campaigns then how did the Clinton Campaign get away with hiring a British spy to do opposition research?

Do you honestly believe that no illegal immigrants campaigned for Obama and Clinton? Are you really suggesting that with a straight face? That no "Dreamer" volunteered at phone banks, etc?

Go out and prove your statements.So far you are just whining like red snowflake.

Re: DUH

[Anonymous Coward]

Come on, it's a tu quoque. That kind of reply is often modded with a score of 5 and the insightful modifier at the end of the day. Once the troll brigade discovers this thread you should be back on track.
But in your defence this is a relevant case and does not deserve to be modded down (at least in my opinion). It's a perfectly legal practise and in fact facebook's business model. Like the threat starter pointed out, what do people expect from a company that turns their users into a commodity that is to be sold? It's not like Cambridge Analytica 'hacked' into some systems obtaining their data or using the data gathered by government agencies to do it.

Re: DUH

[Train0987]

" If they can't find some useful and almost convincing pro-tyranny posts to mod up to +5 and keep them there, we can expect this story to disappear shortly and a re-write to show up tomorrow."

The re-write just hit the front page...

Re: DUH

[LynnwoodRooster]

Hillary Clinton hired a foreign worker herself, and I don't remember you ranting about that... Not that you should have, because it is NOT illegal to hire overseas contractors, but it IS illegal to accept overseas contributions as Obama did, not to mention the Obama campaign was fined for illegal donations.

Re: DUH

[LynnwoodRooster]

Hillary Clinton hired Christopher Steele who is not a US citizen. And she signed up illegal aliens to work for her campaign as well.

Re: DUH

[PopeRatzo]

Not that you should have, because it is NOT illegal to hire overseas contractors

Yeah, it is.

but it IS illegal to accept overseas contributions as Obama did [thehill.com]

That opinion piece is by the famous Dick Morris, of Fox New/Hannity renown. You will notice he doesn't provide any citations or evidence. Just his assertions.

not to mention the Obama campaign was fined for illegal donations

Better read that article more closely.

Re: DUH

[LynnwoodRooster]

What law prohibits hiring a foreign worker for a campaign? Because the FEC is quite explicit and while a foreign national cannot contribute money or tangible assets, they can work for a campaign.

And you do realize that Dick Morris was one of the most powerful men in the first Clinton term, and directed Clinton's 1996 re-election campaign until he we caught letting a prostitute listen in on Presidential phone calls. But I guess because he goes on Fox every once in a while he's a bad guy?

From the article about fines for Obama's campaign:

The resulting fine, one of the largest ever handed down by the FEC, is the result of a failure to disclose or improperly disclosing thousands of contributions to Obama for America during the then-senator's 2008 presidential run, documents show.

That means they did not disclose or did so improperly. And then it goes on to cite they illegally accepted donations above $46,000. Sorry, just because you "gave it back" does not mean you didn't violate the law. If I steal from you, and then give it back - doesn't make it right, I still broke the law in the first place.

Re: DUH

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't dislike Obama. I just hate hypocrisy. I fucking hate Clinton, but am just tired of running her over the coals. She'll never be president now (that piece of work had no business being anywhere close to the that role). I doubt she ever did anything for a good reason ever, rather the only reason she got out of bed was to enrich herself. The comments out of her mouth, putting herself out there in case Obama got assassinated (LOL) or telling people that they needed to subvert the vote of the Palestinians, or the completely different face from her platform when in front of the room full of bankers. It goes on and on. And the craziness of the media in swooning over her...I completely do not understand how they felt it was OK that they would treat the election as a foregone conclusion and that she was the chosen one. It was blatant and over the top. I lost all respect I had for our media here in the US during that election.

Re: DUH

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh... So since someone else did some shady shit in the past it's ok for everyone who comes after to do the same shady shit? The United States has the president it deserves. A total fucking moron to lead the millions of loyal morons and agitate the other morons.

Re: DUH

[PopeRatzo]

What law prohibits hiring a foreign worker for a campaign?

I'm sorry I didn't respond to you earlier. I was too busy following the recent developments in the story. It appears that FEC violations would be the least of Cambridge Analytica's problems, considering there is now video tape of their CEO confessing to bribery, blackmail and using Ukranian prostitutes for purposes of blackmail (human trafficking). And not just once, but admitting on camera that they have a "history" of doing this. Did I mention that he said all these things on video?

This is becoming so much fun.

https://www.channel4.com/news/...

Re: DUH

[Anonymous Coward]

And absolutely nothing will come out of it. Sucks to be you.

Re: DUH

[LynnwoodRooster]

Nice deflect! Good to see you were completely wrong, but not surprising to see you simply cannot admit it. There is no law prohibiting hiring a foreign worker for a campaign.

Re: DUH

[PopeRatzo]

There is no law prohibiting hiring a foreign worker for a campaign.

I'm sorry old friend, but that's just not true. If you read through that link to the FEC, you'll see that there can't be any foreign workers in a "decision-making" capacity or "participating" in decision making.

Here's the language:

Participation by foreign nationals in decisions involving election-related activities

Commission regulations prohibit foreign nationals from directing, dictating, controlling, or directly or indirectly participating in the decision-making process of any person (such as a corporation, labor organization, political committee, or political organization) with regard to any election-related activities. Such activities include, the making of contributions, donations, expenditures, or disbursements in connection with any federal or nonfederal elections in the United States, or decisions concerning the administration of any political committee. Foreign nationals are also prohibited from involvement in the management of a political committee, including any separate segregated fund (SSF), nonconnected committee, or the nonfederal accounts of any of these committees. See Explanation and Justification for 11 CFR 110.20 at 67 FR 69946 (November 19, 2002)

And further, this also would apply to volunteers...

However, the Commission cautioned that the foreign national could not manage or participate in any of the campaign committee’s decision-making processes.

Now (and pay attention here, Rooster, because I see your eyes starting to glaze over), members of the Cambridge Analytica staff have already snitched that CA was give legal guidance by their own lawyers warning them not to have foreign nationals in key positions and that advice was ignored and laws have been broken. This isn't me saying this, it's Cambridge Analytica legal counsel. And beyond that, staff was instructed to lie about it to authorities.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk...

Re: DUH

[Anonymous Coward]

...and you ignore facts.
Has Hillary ever had a scandal?

Re: DUH

[LynnwoodRooster]

I'm sorry old friend, but that's just not true. If you read through that link to the FEC, you'll see that there can't be any foreign workers in a "decision-making" capacity or "participating" in decision making.

So a data collection agency is now making decisions? I guess then you also hold Hillary Clinton and the DNC as 100% guilty via their hiring of Christopher Steele!

Now (and pay attention here, Rooster, because I see your eyes starting to glaze over), members of the Cambridge Analytica staff have already snitched that CA was give legal guidance by their own lawyers warning them not to have foreign nationals in key positions and that advice was ignored and laws have been broken. This isn't me saying this, it's Cambridge Analytica legal counsel.

Gee, I wonder why? Perhaps it's easier to avoid the entire thing than try to do the legal amount without running into the issue we have here?

But clearly, if you think CA was an issue - then the hiring of Christopher Steele - a British Citizen - was clearly an issue for you too, correct?

Re: DUH

[PopeRatzo]

So a data collection agency is now making decisions?

Yes, they participate in telling the Trump campaign who to target. If they were just providing data to the campaign, it would be OK.

I guess then you also hold Hillary Clinton and the DNC as 100% guilty via their hiring of Christopher Steele!

No, see above.

Gee, I wonder why? Perhaps it's easier to avoid the entire thing than try to do the legal amount without running into the issue we have here?

So, what you're saying is that you believe Cambridge Analytica instructed their staff to lie to authorities because it was "easier" and you're OK with that? Remember, the CEO of Cambridge Analytica confessed on camera to serious crimes and CA's own legal team warned them about foreign nationals in decision-making roles.

But clearly, if you think CA was an issue - then the hiring of Christopher Steele - a British Citizen - was clearly an issue for you too, correct?

No. See above. As you have pointed out, it's not illegal to hire a foreign national as a contractor, as long as they're not in a position to make decisions or participate in making decisions. Part of Cambridge Analytica's role in the Trump campaign, when they were using bribery, blackmail or human trafficking, was telling the Trump campaign who to target with their ads. Steele's role was doing research and then putting that research in a dossier.

Now I bet you can see the difference between the two if you're being honest with yourself.

You are smugly for sale

[Anonymous Coward]

Zuck and crew are not only selling you, they are smugly doing so. Condescendingly so.

Re:You are smugly for sale

[Anonymous Coward]

That why Facebook is past is use by date.
Stop using the cesspit of Zuck. Everytime you use it they get to know more about YOU in order to sell it to the highest bidder at home or away.

Back in WW2 there was a saying. "Careless talk costs lives"
People today should shut the hell up a bit more.

I've never used FacaeBook and never ever will. Proud of it? You bet.

Donald Trump, an eager traitor.

[Anonymous Coward]

None of this would even matter if Donald Trump wasn't so eager to collude with Russia's hacking and information warfare.

A little more loyalty, and alot less treason would go a long way to combatting Russia's attack on our country.

The republican party has made helping Donald Trump get away with treason its top priority.

Re:Donald Trump, an eager traitor.

[Anonymous Coward]

Dream on.

Re:Donald Trump, an eager traitor.

[HiThere]

If you wanted to say malfeasance, fraud, bribery, perversion of office, and being a prick, I'd be right with you, but the constitution defines treason, and until Russia is defined as an official enemy then treason isn't even possible.

Section 3. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

LIKE

[Anonymous Coward]

or is it "LOVE"?

What about Facebook itself?

[Anonymous Coward]

This was done by one application builder. Imagine the raw political power Facebook itself has.

Re:What about Facebook itself?

[another_twilight]

Better to be the kingmaker than the king, and if you control the information that the kingmaker's need ...

Cambridge Analytics are dead. They were only effective whilst they remained hidden. They may well restructure, fold or shift assets, but by the time they are back someone else will be sucking from Facebook's teat and all the while Facebook can say 'It wasn't us who meddled'.

It's almost beyond political power. Win or lose, all parties end up using Facebook data.

Something about 'the spice must flow' and 'he who controls the spice ...'

Re:What about Facebook itself?

[mschwanke97402]

Am I mistaken, or wasn’t Peter Thiel on the Facebook board or actualy in the Facebook C-Suite and also involved with Cambridge Analytica? The whole thing was an inside job. Could anyone get away with this sort of thing without Facebook management’s consent?

Ha ha you thought they sold just ad space.

[Anonymous Coward]

And everyone thought they just sold ad space.

Channel 4 News? Which Channel 4 would that be?

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, I see, It's in the UK.

Because (American that I am) I can think of dozens of Channel 4s, most of them having a news broadcast.

You are the product.

[Anonymous Coward]

Good, about time. Hope this is the beginning of a massive tech-stock purge, a la 2000. I'm NOT saying all tech is bad. But I'm sick and tired of seeing companies whose business model involves privacy theft prospering. Whether it's Facebook, which tracks activities OUTSIDE their website, Google, which aims to hoover up as much personal data as possible (MS is about the same with Nadella in charge), or even Uber, which wants to monopolize short-distance transportation, with every trip being tied to an identified person. Let the purge begin.

Users won't know or care

[Anonymous Coward]

Most people won't know or care about this "data breach", which it is not. I don't understand why all these so called pundits always make a bold claim about the lid being blown off this, and user confidence that...By next week, we will all be talking about something else

Re:Users won't know or care

[Train0987]

That is the entire purpose of a propaganda campaign. They've already moved on to the next piece of propaganda before the last one can be refuted.

Re:Users won't know or care

[HiThere]

There's no particular sign that this particular piece of information *can* honestly be refuted. If you have reason to believe otherwise, I'd like to know what it is.

Cambridge Analytica, hookers & blow

[PopeRatzo]

This just came across the transom. Apparently, Cambridge Analytica was doing more than just data mining for the Trump campaign.

https://boingboing.net/2018/03...

https://www.channel4.com/news/...

Re:Cambridge Analytica, hookers & blow

[GrimSavant]

That escalated quickly.

A couple of days ago it was a back and forth about whether Cambridge Analytica used malware for a data breach or it was simply an extension of Facebook's heavy data collection business, and how that intersects with the differences in data protection laws in Europe versus the United States. Now it looks like they are a straight up criminal enterprise, using bribery and honeypots with prostitutes. Doesn't even take any connection with the Russians for the excrement to be colliding with the ventilator on CA's part, and this surely doesn't rule out dubious connections with various governments like the Russians. Until reading about this I had not considered even remotely the possibility of a British extradition request for Steve Bannon, he was a VP on CAs board among other things before more officially switching to working with Trump.

Re:Cambridge Analytica, hookers & blow

[PopeRatzo]

That escalated quickly.

It seems like as soon as one of these stories starts to break, all the bad guys can't help themselves but blurt out their crimes. It's like the part of the James Bond movie where the villain lays out his whole evil plan because he thinks he's gotten away with it and feels some twisted need for James Bond's approval or something.

I didn't see it mentioned in the Channel 4 story, but apparently over the past 48 hours there were superhuman efforts undertaken by Cambridge Analytica to keep this video confessional from being broadcast.

The whole thing is just so fucking absurd. I used to say that this entire Trump/Treason Saga was going to make for a great movie some day, but now I'm thinking that it's going to have to be at least a mini-series. Maybe directed by the Coen Brothers.

This will be fun

[bestweasel]

From the Channel 4 link.

In one exchange, when asked about digging up material on political opponents, [CEO-for-now] Mr Nix said they could "send some girls around to the candidateâ(TM)s house", adding that Ukrainian girls "are very beautiful, I find that works very well".

In another he said: " Weâ(TM)ll offer a large amount of money to the candidate, to finance his campaign in exchange for land for instance, weâ(TM)ll have the whole thing recorded, weâ(TM)ll blank out the face of our guy and we post it on the Internet". ...

Tonight, a Cambridge Analytica spokesman said: "We entirely refute any allegation that Cambridge Analytica or any of its affiliates use entrapment, bribes, or so-called "honey-traps" for any purpose whatsoever⦠We routinely undertake conversations with prospective clients to try to tease out any unethical or illegal intentionsâ¦".

Oh great

[Anonymous Coward]

When the Obama campaign does it, it's a great victory with friends, but when Trump's campaign does it, it's a crime. Have you ever looked in the mirror and saw a dirty racist? You should try mirrors.

Re:Oh great

[Zaiff Urgulbunger]

When the Obama campaign does it, it's a great victory with friends, but when Trump's campaign does it, it's a crime. Have you ever looked in the mirror and saw a dirty racist? You should try mirrors.

1). They're not _quite_ the same; afaik, the Obama campaign used social media to target people with advertising, but the Trump campaign appears to have used it to deliberately subvert the demographic process by feeding targets with fake news,

2). You recall that the Republicans were not exactly keen on Trump either? So some how he managed to defeat all the other Republican candidates (likely using same techniques), and now the result is?.... likely pretty bad for the entire Republican party for at least one term, but quite possibly many.

This is good for no one, regardless of which way you lean. So unless your political outlook is 100% Trump or nothing, then you should really be happy this abuse of democracy is being exposed.

Putin, Brexit & Trump

[Anonymous Coward]

Brexit & Trump could be tied together here; there's long been speculation that Putin is behind both but it still seemed a bit far-fetched. Now I'm not so sure.

Perhaps the nerve gas attack on a retired and otherwise fairly harmless Russian traitor living quietly in England is part of a diversionary move to take the heat off the Donald. Putin appears to be going to great lengths to have the finger of blame pointed at him, while at the same time brazenly denying it.