Videos Proves of How Your Facebook Data Is Collected and wont to Win Elections - 2

Videos Proves of How Your Facebook Data Is Collected and wont to Win Elections - 2

Who Is Cambridge Analytica?

Cambridge Analytica may be a voter-profiling company that’s owned by Strategic Communications Laboratories (SCL), a gaggle that claims to possess “conducted behavioral change programs in over 60 countries” (emphasis mine). They’ve also reportedly boasted of getting influenced elections round the world.

“The information environment has become the new modern battlefield where state and non-state actors employ sophisticated propaganda and disinformation,” reads SCL’s list of services for the defense industry.

A Must Read: How Your Facebook Data Is Collected and wont to Win Elections 

This is a corporation steeped within the tactics of data warfare. And their clients include governments round the world, and even NATO. (To be fair, not all of their projects are sinister-sounding; they’ve worked on youth engagement, telephone network viability, and food security, as well.)

Cambridge Analytica’s parent company exists to require strong action, through data and messaging, to influence the minds of giant swaths of individuals . While this isn’t Cambridge, there’s little question that the mindset exists in both groups.

Which explains a number of the rather disturbing ideas they share during this Channel 4 sting (including using Ukrainian girls to seduce Sri Lankan politicians):

Kogan, Cambridge, and Data Collection

Both Cambridge and Facebook have made tons of claims. Cambridge knew that they were getting illegally harvested data (or didn’t), Cambridge said they didn’t have any data from Facebook (then said they did), Facebook downplayed the scope of the breach (then didn’t)… it’s tons to stay up with.

The story here is that Cambridge Analytica used data obtained by Aleksandr Kogan, who had harvested information from 50 million profiles.

Dr. Kogan got that information through a test app and a loophole in Facebook’s data-collection rules. It’s important to notice , however, that Kogan likely didn't violate any rules. Facebook says that Kogan told them the app was for tutorial purposes, which selling the info to Cambridge Analytica may be a violation of policy.

Kogan has responded by saying that while the app was initially for tutorial purposes, he later changed the app’s terms and conditions. Facebook says he should have informed the corporate directly when he did that.

It’s an enormous , confusing mess.

Who’s guilty Here?

It’s easy to point fingers during this situation. Kogan sold data he shouldn’t have. Cambridge Analytica bought data they shouldn’t have. Facebook should are expecting this sort of thing. The Trump campaign contracted with a corporation that features a history of shady practices. And yes, all of these people are guilty . But may be a party missing from these recriminations?

Look at it this manner .

The data that we generate on social media is a particularly valuable resource. It’s worth billions of dollars. Like oil or gold, people will attend extremes to urge it. They’ll buy and sell it. Steal it. Maybe even attend war over it.

But unlike oil or gold, we've control over this particular resource.

Our ambivalence is that the root explanation for this controversy. We don’t want to face that truth, but we've to think about it.

Yes, Cambridge Analytica used illegally obtained Facebook data. But let’s be honest: they probably didn’t need to . People divulge the permissions to their Facebook accounts a day . Remember the people giving the Obama campaign permission to access their Facebook data “consciously or otherwise” back in 2012? That hasn’t changed.

READ ALSO:  Your Antivirus May be Tracking You, Here is What You Need to Know

Whether it’s through online quizzes, Facebook apps, web tracking through Like buttons, or simply using Facebook to sign into an internet site , we’re making a gift of our data all the time. Cambridge Analytica just got it a touch faster than they might have otherwise.

It’s been well established that Facebook might be a strong force, permanently or evil, in global politics. Cambridge Analytica had 50 million accounts, but that’s nothing compared to the info that some groups, including Facebook itself, have access to. SCL isn't the sole group out there offering services like this. Our information isn't only valuable—it’s powerful, and it’s dangerous within the wrong hands.

Facebook itself has advertised its power in elections. With over 2 billion users, it's more power than Cambridge Analytica or SCL will ever have. But we’ve remained willfully unaware of the matter this represents.

There’s possibly no other industry which will benefit more from your data than politics. As long as our Facebook data is valuable—and it’s hard to ascertain that abating—companies like SCL and Cambridge Analytica are getting to do whatever they will to urge it.

Will we still make it easy for them? and can we allow them to do whatever they need with it?

Assigning blame during this case isn’t easy. the whole system has been headed toward an occasion like this. it had been only a matter of your time .

The Future of knowledge and Elections

The difference between the reactions in 2012 and 2016 is worth brooding about . Was it Snowden’s revelations that taught us to be wary of knowledge collection? the large data breaches that we’ve seen over the past few years? Or is it because this data collection was done on behalf of Republicans, rather than Democrats?

But when our data starts finding its way into the hands of political campaigns, and when it starts getting used to influence the course of national (or even international) politics, many of us find that to be a special matter.

Regardless of why we’re talking about it now, it’s something we'd like to stay talking about. we all know that Facebook sells our data. And when they’re selling to advertisers, we generally stay silent.

No comments