Slashdot Mirror


Cambridge Analytica Shuts Down Amid Scandal Over Use of Facebook Data (gizmodo.com)

Gizmodo reports that Cambridge Analytica and its parent company, the SCL Group, are shutting down. "The news was announced during a conference call led by Julian Wheatland, the current chairman of the SCL Group who was reportedly tapped to take over as Cambridge Analytica's next CEO," reports Gizmodo. "Both Cambridge Analytica and SCL Elections will now close their doors." From the report: During the call, Wheatland said that the board determined that rebranding the company's current offerings in the current environment is "futile." Cambridge Analytica and SCL have offices in London, New York City, Arlington, Virginia, and Washington, D.C. The conference call was originally scheduled for Tuesday morning, but was repeatedly pushed back until early Wednesday afternoon, ultimately getting rescheduled more than half a dozen times. In explaining the decision to close the offices, Wheatland cited the ongoing investigations into Cambridge Analytica's massive data harvesting scandal, damage to the company's reputation, and loss of clients. In March, Britain's information commissioner announced that she was seeking a warrant to investigate any misconduct by the data analytics firm, looking to search both its offices and its servers. UK authorities raided the London office later that month, but have yet to release their findings. Meanwhile, embattled former CEO Alexander Nix refused to testify before the British Parliamentary media committee regarding the firm's misuse of Facebook user data.

67 comments

  1. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  2. Yea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yea

  3. It's TOTALY not because they were a rip off... by Kenja · · Score: 2

    I mean, sure they use discredited pseudoscience to claim to be able to provide consumer predictions that they have never been able to back up with results, but that's beside the point!

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    1. Re: It's TOTALY not because they were a rip off... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed. Still - Facebook gets off scot free? How is that ok?

    2. Re:It's TOTALY not because they were a rip off... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      their results speak for themselves. look who won the election.

    3. Re: It's TOTALY not because they were a rip off... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because of the User Agreement and Terms of Service that discloses your data may be shared with 3rd parties?

    4. Re:It's TOTALY not because they were a rip off... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that they were just a front for russian agitprop, which has been demonstrated to be pretty damn effective

    5. Re:It's TOTALY not because they were a rip off... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm sure that If I had access to all your Facebook data that there's no way that lowly ol' Anonymous me could influence your thinking. Nope. No way.

    6. Re:It's TOTALY not because they were a rip off... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Everybody who disagrees with ME is wrong and stupid too! High five.

    7. Re:It's TOTALY not because they were a rip off... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So Cambridge Analytica are responsible for Hillary Clinton's campaign. Wierd.

    8. Re:It's TOTALY not because they were a rip off... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You just described the entire advertising business.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    9. Re: It's TOTALY not because they were a rip off... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nevermind the constant political censorship of even approaching slightly left that Facebook deals in. Suggesting that rich people should pay more taxes has gotten thousands of accounts banned.

    10. Re: It's TOTALY not because they were a rip off... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, doesn't the Nation of Islam run by that Louis Farrakhan dude who tells people to 'kill whitey' (search YT) still have a FB page?

      Fuck Zuck, that racist-enabler

      That's the kind of puke that, if you were attacked suddenly by dogs, would knock you down before he ran so the dogs would get you first

  4. Yale Analytica! by Zorro · · Score: 4, Funny

    Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap!

    1. Re: Yale Analytica! by johnsnails · · Score: 1, Funny

      Don't you mean "done with sheep"

    2. Re: Yale Analytica! by Hognoxious · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's Cambridge Analytica, not Cardiff.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    3. Re: Yale Analytica! by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      Could it be Cambridge Analyciya?

      I mean they may as well be, they know everything else about facebook users.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    4. Re:Yale Analytica! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes it's cheap to delete all internal emails so there is no further repercussions.

    5. Re: Yale Analytica! by mjwx · · Score: 1

      It's Cambridge Analytica, not Cardiff.

      I wish I had not already commented before reading that as I have mod points. Golf clap, good sir.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  5. Re:Shutdown? No. by Len · · Score: 5, Informative

    These people will just start a new business and rehire the core team. Watch.

    And here it is: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/05/02/cambridge_analytica_shutdown/

  6. Wait for it.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I give it 3 years and the guys running it will reappear doing the same tactics all over again....
    These people never learn.

    1. Re:Wait for it.... by nukenerd · · Score: 3, Insightful

      These people never learn.

      They do learn - that they can get away with it, and that there is an endless supply of bent companies who want to hire them, and of suckers who let themselves be victims.

    2. Re:Wait for it.... by mrbester · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They did better than that. They have filed for bankruptcy to avoid pesky legal fees being anywhere near their billions and are currently trading as Emerdata, at the same address, doing the same business, with the same people in the same positions as CA, which was just a shell company anyway (so they could avoid tax).

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
  7. Re:Shutdown? No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Meh. I don't even care what Cambridge Analytica does. It was Facebook that allowed it to happen.

  8. Sale by 110010001000 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Are they having a 50% off going-out-of-business sale for all of your data?

    1. Re:Sale by GregMmm · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Absolutely! They have to. If this is an asset (which this data most certainly is) they it must be auctioned off to pay off debt. At this point the data is just like a chair they own in the office.

      By the way, it will be the highest bidder, so if it's 50% off that after they marked it up 100%!!

    2. Re:Sale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interesting if the same happens to Facebook. Going out of business sale - all of your private messages are being sold off as assets to whatever company wants to buy them. :)

    3. Re:Sale by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1, Interesting

      That data is worthless right now, because it is under active investigation by the ICO. Anyone who bought it would instantly become part of that investigation.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  9. Re:Shutdown? No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    No it was users who let it happen. Facebook made it pretty clear it would rape you from very early on. The fact people still use / used it is more to do with a failure of education.

  10. Re:Shutdown? No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sure, until you realize that the same sorts of people have been monetizing slashdot since Dice owned it and they are using your IP address to identify AC's

  11. I'm sure Cambridge Analytica was the only one... by GregMmm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Doesn't anyone wonder if there are more "Cambridge Analyticas" out there? Don't tell me Facebook only allowed this to happen with one company. Think of all the money to be made.

    Ever wonder why Cambridge Analytica is the bad guy when Facebook allowed this to happen?

  12. Re:Shutdown? No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The fact people still use / used...

    he fact people still use . used...

  13. Re:Shutdown? No. by Anubis+IV · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Came here to say just this. It'll be a shutdown, followed by a sell-off to a "completely different" company that is actually just the same people doing the same thing.

  14. Parent company still in business... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A 3 letter agency starting with N, ending with A, and an S in the middle

    1. Re: Parent company still in business... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck you, Trump Eunuch.

  15. Re:Shutdown? No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Who will buy the "intellectual property" and nothing will change.

  16. preemptive strike to avoid litigation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Highly likely this is just a strategy to avoid losing a zillion dollars to litigation. If the company folds, the guilty parties will avoid having to spend months, even years, in court.

    Hate this.

    (CAPTCHA = "matched"!)

  17. Re:Shutdown? No. by iMadeGhostzilla · · Score: 1

    Exactly. You can see it from their press release. The new business will more or less discreetly tell the potential clients they are former CA, implying that they helped "change history", however implausible that is. They will keep the subject alive as they only profit from people talking about it.

    But then you have to admit their marketing is brilliant, and for that reason they indeed are worth hiring.

  18. Fake scandal you mean. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because nobody gives a crap you were stupid enough to hand facebook your data.

  19. Re:Shutdown? No. by PPH · · Score: 4, Funny

    In true form for British humor, this URL works as well (SFW):
    https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/05/02/cambridge_anal_plugged/

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  20. Re:Shutdown? No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    A shame they didn't name the new company "The Aristocrats".

  21. Six Month Later... by GlennC · · Score: 5, Funny

    A new company called "Oxford Interpretive" announces their opening. The founders and officers have familiar names.

    --
    Go on, citizen, stamp the vote card. R or D, your choice.
    1. Re:Six Month Later... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Six months? Six hours.

    2. Re:Six Month Later... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      FYI, they actually called it Emerdata.

  22. Re: Shutdown? No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Downs Syndrome?

  23. Re:Shutdown? No. by gweihir · · Score: 2

    Obviously. Different name, same old despicable services.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  24. Next time help only democrats by Jarwulf · · Score: 0

    nobody will care or may even praise how innovative you are.

  25. Re:I'm sure Cambridge Analytica was the only one.. by Mashiki · · Score: 0

    Sure. We already know that during both elections for Obama, they got access to the data through a 1st party pulling the same slop like CA did. Far as people can figure from the DNC leaks, there was an unnamed company involved for Hillary too. The difference is, when it was the democrats doing it was fine. But when a company did the same for the RNC and Trump it was a big deal.

    --
    Om, nomnomnom...
  26. Guaranteed for life! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But they promised me in the ad that my data access would be guaranteed for life!

  27. Re: Shutdown? No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yup, nothing but the name.

  28. lol - no, the "entity" named SCL is gone... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    But all the assets, including the stolen data has already been siphoned off to another, currently unknown, entity already protected under LLC covers.

    It will be the same shit, different name.

    1. Re:lol - no, the "entity" named SCL is gone... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      unknown? no it is very well known. owned and run by the same people are even housed in the same building.

  29. Re:Shutdown? No. by rtb61 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Not a shutdown, oh no, they are declaring bankruptcies to fend off civil suits, bankrupting companies, sticking people with bad debt and making sure they can not be sued, just normal operations for companies run by psychopaths. No shame, no sense of guilt, just more corruption on top of past corruption to lead to even more corruption. Of course if all of this can be proved to be purposeful with intent to defraud and hide income in tax havens, than those who run the companies can be targeted and if they are not, a sure and solid line of corruption to governments of the day, pretty much become self evident.

    --
    Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
  30. Re:I'm sure Cambridge Analytica was the only one.. by Darkling-MHCN · · Score: 3, Informative

    Anyone could have done what Cambridge Analytica did....

    You just need a Facebook account, agree (and ignore) a few Facebook TOS and you're good to go, you can start creating Facebook apps today.

    What you can't do now which Cambridge Analytica did, is use the Facebook Graph API that was available before 2014 which gave developers far more liberties than Facebook ever should have allowed.

    The major issue has been lack of oversight, Facebook makes no review of the systems it grants access to. The liberties that developers still have, present a tangible risk to people's privacy. Facebook is still relying on their users having some discretion and not just run around granting everything access to their Facebook.

    So yes I imagine there are tens of thousands of entities out there using similar tricks with Facebook that Cambridge Analytica used. I doubt many of these companies have links to current and former members of the intelligence community and are using the data to distort the democratic process like Cambridge Analytica did. At least they're no where near as successful as Cambridge Analytica was.

    Of course as linked here Cambridge Analytica is now Emerdata so there's at least one company that still exists that's exactly like Cambridge Analytica.

  31. Re:Shutdown? No. by Xest · · Score: 3, Informative

    Fortunately UK data protection law allows individuals to be held to account, so shutting down the company doesn't absolve the people who ran it of responsibility. They can still be held individually accountable for illegality relating to personal data at a company they worked at. The fact the company has gone doesn't matter, and the ICO have made this clear themselves in a statement - they're not going to stop just because the company has shut down.

    All new companies processing such data have to register with the Information Commissioners Office too, it's a criminal offence not to do so. As such the ICO will know if they're having another go and can audit them regularly based on past behavior and ensure compliance, or fine for non-compliance.

    So whilst I agree, there's no doubt they'll try again, it's possible that the ICO will still file criminal proceedings against them, and if they're found guilty they may be banned from running or being director at a company for some time.

    As such, I wouldn't assume they've got away with it, the ICO will take time to build their case and pursue them, but it'll happen if there's illegality.

    It's also noting that GDPR becomes law this month too, so they'll be held to even higher standards which will basically make it impossible to do even much of the legal stuff they did before, much less the illegal - not simply because there are tougher laws that affect them directly, but because companies around them will be held to GDPR which will make it much harder for CA to acquire data in the first place even if they're operating outside the law themselves.

  32. Cambridge Analytica RENAMES ITSELF by sproketboy · · Score: 3, Informative

    FTFA

  33. Cambridge Anal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    LOL

  34. Re:Shutdown? No. by mjwx · · Score: 1

    These people will just start a new business and rehire the core team. Watch.

    Yep, likely to be reborn as something like Oxford Logica.

    In the UK, the process of dissolving and reforming a company, usually to avoid debts, is called "phoenixing". Sadly the law seems to do little about it, even the HMRC (tax dept) only makes a half-hearted effort.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  35. Re:Shutdown? No. by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

    A shame they didn't name the new company "The Aristocrats

    I'm sure that Guthrie Govan, Marco Minneman, and Brian Beller would be quite upset.

    https://youtu.be/EJmPFBWukq0

    Strat

    --
    Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
  36. Did they commit a crime? by biggaijin · · Score: 0

    There's no crime here that I know of and they did not do anything that I am sure others have done. The politicians are all screaming because they are incapable of doing anything else about this.

  37. Re:Shutdown? No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wonder if we will know who they will become.

  38. Shelled and dumped by thunderclees · · Score: 1

    CA's board has likely moved most of the assets of CA into a shell company and will wind down CA stiffing creditors and investors. The shell company will continue the rape of privacy for profit of Facebook, Twitter and others users like others are doing right now.

    You can try and make this illegal and in some ways it already is but this is ineffective, the lure of big ad and big gov dollars is too strong. The only effective method of dealing with this is not to use the service.

    "The question isn't, 'What do we want to know about people?', It's, 'What do people want to tell about themselves'?" - Mark Zuckerberg

  39. Re:I'm sure Cambridge Analytica was the only one.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Except for the mountains of way in which it was completely different, as in the Obama campaign having opt-in requests to any data it gathered and full permission from every single participant, and fully explained what would be done with the data, instead of literally stealing it from people through deception like CA has admitted to doing.

  40. Goodbye Cambridge Analytica by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hello Aimbridge Canalytical

  41. Re:I'm sure Cambridge Analytica was the only one.. by Mashiki · · Score: 1

    No, Obama didn't have an opt-in. The company that was handling it scraped the data of *everyone* and facebook knew it. They even sent someone to help.

    --
    Om, nomnomnom...