At least the Brits (and the EU) are worried about protecting their citizens' personal data, unlike the US, where anything that can be monetized is. When Facebook first started. It had no ideology. When you signed up, you could specify your school, company, or community, & it acted as a way to bring these related groups closer together. Gradually these communities were stretched to include anybody, anywhere as one big community. When Facebook became so popular that Zuckerberg & the other execs decided they could become millionaires & billionaires by taking it public, they had to come up with a business plan showing how it could be used to make money before they could risk an IPO. The model they came up with is that they could collect the information of all of its members & sell it to third-parties for a major profit. This money-making scheme attracted enough investors to insure a successful IPO. Facebook users went from being its customers to its commodities. It has all been downhill from there. We need privacy laws that would force Facebook, Google, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, & the other mega-collectors & marketers of personal information to stop playing deceptive games like changing ever more complex privacy policies faster than users can keep up with, & require that every user's data is totally private unless the user specifically opts in - with the foreknowledge of who will be getting what data & for what purpose (& what third-party privacy policies are with the data).
2
Zuckerberg says that Facebook never “sold” user data. Apparently Facebook just shared it with favored vendors on the condition of obtaining private customer information from those vendors as a quid pro quo. At the same time, Facebook apparently withheld such information from other vendors who it viewed as rivals in order to punish them, presumably for deigning to compete with Facebook. Antitrust issues?
Despite Zuckerberg’s protests, the internal emails released by Parliament show that selling private customer data was in fact discussed and considered by Facebook as a business strategy. The facts will eventually come out as the light of day is shined on Facebook, and we will learn if Facebook actually pursued a selling strategy.
Most pernicious of all, as reported by the NY Times, after all the fanfare before Congress about coming clean with its past, Facebook is still seeking to conceal the actual facts. Incredibly, it sought to quash the Parliament’s release of documents, claiming that selective emails were being made public and taken out of context. Here is Facebook’s remedy for Parliament’s alleged selectivity: release to the public all internal communications on the subject of sharing or selling private customer information for all of the years in question. Then, everything can be viewed in context, and users, shareholders and governments can make informed decisions about Facebook.
Personal private information should not be treated as a commodity.
4
Facebook is a surveillance corporation. They are "big brother".
The sooner users come to that point of view, the better.
13
It is time for the FCC to regulate Facebook, Twitter, etc.
4
Facebook needs to be regulated. Facebook along with its morally corrupt leaders need to be reined in.
4
"The documents’ publication coincides with a more hawkish shift in public opinion toward online collection of user data..."
What does this mean, exactly? "Hawkish" is a term coming from hawks and doves, proponents and opponents of a war. That people are more reluctant to give free rein to data companies like Facebook to use their data is hawkish? Does that mean those who want corporations to have access to every last detail of your life are doves?
This article, and its companion, suffer from not knowing or not explaining how the AI industry runs. Well done, data conservative AI has been abandoned because of pressure from capitalists: Venture capitalists who do all the things Facebook is accused of here, and Wall Street capitalists who want their ROI yesterday if not sooner. You can't get a job anywhere in tech promoting hard AI or working on theories that take time to mature. Instead, everyone rushes to the next quick money -- SVN, Deep Learning, etc. But doing AI with SOMs and DL and other stuff now accessible with of big compute power needs tons of data. Money flows to people who get that data any way they can. Then something scandalizes and journalists come around to act shocked.
People who were "hawkish" on data back when it mattered are and were considered unhireable. But NYTimes, like all the rest of journalism, likes 'em young in tech, so you won't hear about that. It is possible to build another world, but not while this one is so set in its ways.
1
George Orwell would be stunned and amazed about how willingly ordinary people give away their personal information so others can profit from it while tracking your every move, word or action.
11
The United States must adopt the same privacy laws as the European Union!
6
Good heavens! Facebook and Twitter, Etc. are all simply like passing notes in class, whispering, or pretending to to sick to stay home. It’s simply being silly! Why is everyone so serious about all this?
Once again, FB in the news for bad things; yet people flock to it.
3
My decision to delete my FB account a few weeks ago seems prescient. I only wish I had never signed up to begin with.
2
As bad as this trove of data is, Facebook did not help itself when the CEO snubbed the Europeans by refusing to go in front of them. Zuckerberg might think he could go to war but Uber has shown the world subverting sovereignties doesn't end well. The Brit may not be like the Chinese or Russian, but she can still wield a big stick when Zuck thought Facebook could run through her
3
Facebook was never about "connecting friends". This is corporate lore for a company that follows in the steps of junk mail marketers.
Before the internet, junk mail companies accumulated data on people: name, address, type of junk mail they've responded to before, built lists, and sold them to people who wanted to market via junk mail. It's very inexpensive to buy data, and a 2% return in sales is considered good.
Zuckerberg sat in that college dorm room, using junk mail as a model, and dreamed of "connectedness", via internet data, as a means to personal wealth.
He succeeded at that, but, the amount of influential power held in Facebook's data, and how it's been used to change elections and promulgate propaganda, how it's sold indiscriminately, shows the company could easily commit treason.
The company's a powerful and irresponsible monopoly. It needs to be broken up, perhaps by each country it operates in, and have independent, non-political regulation and auditing of its sales. It needs to obey the laws of each country it works in, including privacy laws.
No "likes" for Facebook today.
4
Yes. The same company that claims if can’t find a couple hundred of programmers from the 3 million us college grads every year. So they need cheap disposable guest workers.
And our gov elites believes them and keep the H1b visa and l1 visa and f1 visa and opt program. Because of companies like facebook
Where are our leaders?
8
facebook has out lived its usefulness. We no longer need to hook up with people we knew when we were 8. Now it's like smoking. It's useless, causes more harm than good and we should wean ourselves off of it.
Is the such a thing as facebook Anonymous?
6
Facebook gets people to willingly give them free stuff (data) so they can sell it and make billions. Smart business model. Why is this company in the hands of someone who had a good idea at age 18 and now lives in a bubble? It just seems like Facebook should become a utility. Break it up, they have too much power. I don't have an account but if I did, I would rather pay for it than have zero control over my data or rather have no idea how it's being used.
24
It wasn’t even his idea - stolen from the Winklevoss brothers who hired him. Theft is part of Zuckerberg’s original sin, which is why you can’t believe a thing he says
14
@Peter - I removed all of my personal data & closed my Facebook account even before they went public. Insiders tipped me off to what they intended to do to turn an altruistic venture into a corrupt moneymaker. I still keep one Facebook account under a pseudonym with an email address that tracks back to a non-existent confirmation address halfway around the world. I don't friend people or offer any (true) personal data or photos. It is just handy to look at the public data of other people & companies. i have friended a few people, but I had to communicate to them separately first so they would know who this unfamiliar name asking to be friended really is. No data, no face recognition, no trackable IP (I use VPNs, double encryption & type 1 VM hypervisors running a European flavor of Linux to protect my identity). I do the same on the rare social media I want to follow people on. Even Google doesn't know who this identity is or where it exists. I use https://duckduckgo.com to search, which works like Google's search engine except it does not store or disseminate your searches. For serious stuff, I add Tor/Vidalia/Onion technology & work in the deep web. Even my ISP doesn't recognize my IP or MAC, and so is clueless about what I do with a computer. I don't do anything illegal, but I don't give up data either. I've had continuous internet access for 35 years as a consulting programmer, & you can Google my real name & not pickup a full first page of anything directly about me.
1
Facebook really taught me the lesson that if you don't pay for the product it's because YOU are the product. I've always vaguely understood that on some level but never really understood the vile consequences it could have till Facebook became so indispensable to a population that feels a compulsion to share everything.
28
Facebook is just one of the many online agents abusing and profiting from our private information. There are many sites online that gather and sell our personal information and public records (age, address, relatives, FICO, real estate records, etc). And not just information you post online, but your offline information is available online as well -- and you have no rights and no way of controlling it.
It used to be that if someone wanted a public record, they had to go in person to a government office, show ID, fill out paperwork. Now it's just completely unregulated.
The internet and lack of regulations and protections of our personal information has allowed the criminal class (both corporate and dark) access to vastly more victims in extremely insidious ways that leaves the all of us powerless.
There is a sickness in our corporate class. It's called sociopathy. Why are we letting these people continue to put our privacy, our finances, and our lives in danger? They've already had to comply with EU privacy standards. They should be forced to make those same changes in America and worldwide immediately.
6
I’m not sure that smartphones and social media have made the world a better place. I think, in many ways, people were not only happier but more productive and present before they came along.
11
So, Facebook is doing what literally every other business in a competitive, capitalist society would do. It never claimed to be for profit, so even though I want to be outraged, I don’t see anything out of bounds here, unfortunately.
2
@Juju Garcia It never claimed to be for profit, and, yet, it was.
2
Remember when people didn't depend on Facebook because it didn't exist? Remember face to face interactions? I don't use it and don't need it. I have to wonder why so many people can't let go.
12
Nothing new here in the business world. Just feels a little creepy that Facebook members are each a little piece of the stick or carrot used by Facebook.
2
OK, now I am really deleting my Facebook account.
4
Business as usual. Facebook got the best of us: our family, friends, and social life in general. They apparently sold us for a few pennies. Do we expect better from other social venues: Google, Apple, Microsoft? Maybe we the people should create our own circles of love and friendship.
4
Facebook is a tool; use it sparingly and for specific, utilitarian purposes: event invites, networking, promoting a business. But don’t use it as a place to park all your personal sentiments and life history - why would you want a big corporation to know the inner workings of your heart and mind? Leave those for the real thing: face to face interactions without the buffer of a screen (I.e. life).
7
PASS LAWS THAT HOLD SOCIAL MEDIA COMPANIES LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT IS PUBLISHED ON THEIR PLATFORMS.
Social media companies should be held responsible for what is published on their platforms the same way traditional media companies are held responsible for what they publish. Let social media companies get sued for liable, slander, intentional infliction of emotional distress, invasion of privacy, etc. Online discourse would improve and the bogus stories and foreign government interference in elections would decline.
4
I had deleted my Facebook account a year ago and have not looked back since. Trust me, you will not miss it.
10
Facebook needs to go Anderson way for lying
Also, let’s not forget that Facebook gave us trump.
2
Facebook gave us Trump? It ‘may’ have been a factor, and if so, a tiny one. Try asking how the most experienced, most ready, best qualified candidate in recent political memory managed to snatch a defeat from the jaws of victory. Ask Donna “debate questions” Brazile or Debbie Wasserman Schultz why they had no ground game in the swing states, but instead were playing footsie with Bernie.
3
The Onavo acquisition is particularly important for US regulators to understand so they can carry out their antitrust responsibilities. Think of it this way: a bank acquires Experian, Equifax or TransUnion and uses the data to shut out other banks, thereby extending market dominance. In the US, the FTC regulates consumer reporting agencies to prevent manipulation (these agencies have been neglectful in protecting consumer data, but that’s a separate issue).
Until Europe implemented GDPR there had been no protection for personal browsing data.
FB repurposed Onavo, an independent, 3rd party data collector (that marketed its services directly to consumers), to gain competitive advantage by shutting out competitors.
5
I'm afraid that if every page of the Facebook site was headed by a huge Miranda/cigarette warning-style disclaimer regarding the indiscriminate use of their information in any way that might profit Facebook; people would still happily use their Facebook accounts.
3
I haven’t been on Facebook since early 2018 and everyday news gives me reasons to go back and permanently delete my account
3
@Gwenael
Good luck, when I tried to delete my acct several years ago I could only ‘deactivate’ - to activate a year or so later all I had to do was logon normally and it looked as though my page had been viewed and friend requests were made while the acct was supposedly deactivated. If you succeed share the secret!!!
7
Violating privacy _is_ fb's business.
7
@James Gaston Having an expectation of privacy, in any place on the internet, is where everyone went wrong. Anti-trust is the issue. You never had privacy. FB was free. They told you outright it was free to us because they'd sell ads on our pages. If you watch daytime court reality shows, like Judge Judy, you will see ads for lawyers. If you watch the NFL on any of its days and times, you won't see ads for lawyers. You'll see ads for the things NFL watchers are likely to be interested in. Cars, beers. This is the same thing online. Advertisers want to know their ads will be seen by their demographic. It's the same thing on Facebook.... bless their hearts.
1
I thought the NYT coverage the past few months has been naive and overboard.
However, judging by the comments apparently US adults with smartphones don’t realize what apps do, that tech companies collect/analyze consumer data or that there’s no such thing as a free lunch.
BTW - “traditional” companies and non-profits buy and sell your data (such as your address, age and gender) every day. They also try to undermine and attack their competitors while trying to help their partners.
I’m shocked, shocked, I tell you.
Grow up or go back to a flip phone.
3
@MTS
If you read the UK documents, you'll see that they're less "trying to help their partners" than they are trying to disable or devour them. That's called monopoly, and it really isn't a good thing for the market, at all. Read up on your economics. These tech giants are worse than Frankenstein's monster, because they are without any shred of historical memory, or conscience. All they know is "winning" and more, more, more. Sound familiar? Zuckerberg actually makes Gates look good.
5
US antitrust regulatory bodies have grown languid and weak under the falsehood that only foreign monopolies are bad, American ones are fine. This has already weakened American innovation as evidenced by the steep decline in publicly listed companies. Innovative companies are acquired and taken out of the market before they can compete.
5
@Quite Contrary RE Gates comparison, let's not go THAT far....Wait a minute, maybe it's a tie. Too bad US antitrust enforcement is all focused on taking away several gates from American Airlines at DCA.
A company uses access to its product to forge beneficial partnerships and to ward off business rivals.
There is no news here.
5
@Johnny
When the company is a monopoly, that's called unfair business practices. It used to be illegal.
14
So, they tried to make a buck.
Doesn't everyone.
New York Times does the same thing.
Not only that, they publish stolen documents so they can sell more papers.
4
@True Observer
You would prefer newspapers not share publicly available information—made public by a US legislator? Really?
It shouldn't be a surprise that FB does shady things with users data. The thieving started very early on when Zuckerberg stole the idea for the platform from classmates.
13
@Badger
That is exactly why I never signed up -- he was a thief from the start. I'm surprised that people are surprised.
2
Facebook's business model has always been transparent to any one with a lick of common sense. How can you value a company at 1B dollars that makes nothing and sells nothing? These questions should have been asked long ago. What's really interesting about the favoritism part is whether or not Facebook's investors played any role in facilitating these preferential exchanges between FB and Airbnb, etc. Silicon Valley's "meritocracy" has always bathed in a clubby bath of back scratching. Congress needs to look beyond Zuck and Elon to see how many of these trumped up valuations aren't really the byproduct of shameless self dealing.
4
It's spurious logic to say FB has a large market capitalization so of course they are doing things like shutting down competition. US regulators didn't allow it a hundred years ago and shouldn't allow it now–that is if we care about innovation and competitive markets.
1
Okay, this mess needs to end sometime soon because it has gone on too long and it is embarrassing that nothing has been done, and will only be done if the news agencies keep digging. Clearly, Facebook cannot properly govern itself. The Board of Directors are responsible then. If they do not act, then it is agencies of the Federal and State Governments...let's start with the SEC - how many statements have they made to investors that are not truthful or are full of half-truths. Either way, it is illegal, and the SEC must take action. Other Agencies that oversee Facebook are next. Attorney General's -both Federal and State...where are you? Next, Congress??? Congress, step up and ask the hard question, not fluff. Act like Facebook if running for the Supreme Court! Finally, if no one else has the guts, a class action by the shareholders with teeth and an attorney that it highly regarded and impeccable, must take the charge.
The voluminous actions they have taken for their profit at the expense of their users privacy is beyond the pale and can never be justified with just good old common sense.
5
I am having the very interesting experience of going daily to my Facebook page and reading posts by friends, family, former students, etc, which have continued just as always. I actually have some very savvy friends, many of whom are progressives, liberals and Democrats, who are either unaware or don't care about all this frequently expressed outrage against Zuckerberg and Facebook. And then I come to these comments and see what I suppose is the emerging politically correct attitude concerning Facebook. It suddenly struck me that this must be analogous to attitudes of trump supporters when it come to the actual news which must be, 'It's going on but has nothing to do with me.' It's actually kind of humorous in a grim sort of way. Sometimes I long for the days when everyone watched either Cronkite or Huntley and Brinkley and we mostly had a consensus in this country. Sigh.
@Katherine Most humans, whatever their political cheer team, are gullible, apathetic and lazy. We don't even think about where our food, clothes and energy come from, let alone who provides us with our entertainment posing as news. We get the leaders and the institutions we deserve.
7
The first step towards letting of the Facebook habit is to delete the app from your phone. Then, gradually delete it from your laptop and your desktop. After a few months you won’t miss it at all.
10
First and most importantly, shut FB down now. Second, investigate everyone in the "C suite" and if any activities may constitute crimes, refer to appropriate prosecutors for possible grand jury inquiries and potential indictments. Any convictions should be accompanied by heavy fines and long prison terms.
7
Here's a great story, (courtesy of English MP Damian Collins) from an email by Lean In Sheryl, pontificating on what God-like FB will provide to help us poor sheep tell "great stories to our friends and families" in Platform 3.0, circa 2012:
"The fundamental principle that governs Platform usage is a simple concept: reciprocity. Reciprocity involves an equable value exchange between a 3rdparty developer and Facebook. This value exchange involves one of the following from developers: high quality experiences that FB users can use to tell great stories to their friends and family on FB and/or monetary value in the form of revenue sharing or direct payment. In return, Facebook offers a developers access to our Platform.
When considering the implications of reciprocity it is important to note that a second order principle quickly emerges: competitive access. There are a small number of developers whom no amount of sharing to FB or monetary value can justify giving them access to Platform. These developers do not want to participate in the ecosystem we have created, but rather build their own ecosystem at the expense of our users, other developers and, or course, us. That is something that we will not allow."
I want my reciprocity, now, Sheryl. From another ecosystem, far, far away from FB.
17
"The Music Man" (1957)
In July 1912, a traveling salesman, "Professor" Harold Hill arrives in River City, Iowa, intrigued by the challenge of swindling the famously stubborn natives of Iowa.
Masquerading as a traveling band instructor, Hill plans to con the citizens of River City into paying him to create a boys' marching band, including instruments, uniforms, and music instruction books.
Once he has collected the money and the instruments and uniforms have arrived, he will hop the next train out of town, leaving them without their money or a band.
With help from his associate, Marcellus Washburn, Hill deliberately incites mass concern among the parents of River City that their young boys are being seduced into a world of sin and vice by the new pool table in town.
He convinces them that a boys' marching band is the only way to keep the boys of the town out of trouble, and begins collecting their money..."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Music_Man_%281962_film%29#Plot
5
Facebook can’t be trusted.
8
“It’s not good for us unless people also share back to Facebook and that content increases the value of our network. So ultimately, I think the purpose of platform — even the read side — is to increase sharing back into Facebook.”
Translation: Sell the harvested personal data to the highest bidder.
5
I've never joined Facebook and feel all the better for it.
15
Years ago I smelled a rat. Facebook. I had an account for about 2 weeks and tried & tried to erase the account and block any notices or activity. That was 5 years ago and to this very day I am still getting...who want to sell me something.
5
I haven't had a fb account for over 10 years. I encourage others to *permanently* delete theirs. However, I keep reading these reports/articles about facebook's transgressions in various periodicals, including this one. Amazingly, they always include social media platform links, entreating readers to follow them - including facebook. At the very least, can the NYT dump their fb presence?? Or is that going to hurt their bottom line. The irony is too much.
46
@Irving -- Good advice, Irving.
1
we seem to have moved light years from google's original mantra,"don't be evil." if big tech had set out to foment a spirited consumer backlash, earning the well-deserved contempt and loathing of just about everybody, it couldn't have done a better job.
8
@tom post
Agreed, and feature this - I can't locate the reference, but pretty sure "Don't be evil" was ripped off from the House of Blues branding. That theft should tell us just about all we need to know. Does anyone's memory confirm my suspicion?
@Quite Contrary
yep: when google morphed into alphabet.
1
@tom post Google's "don't be evil" has all the sincerity and truth of Facebook's "connect the world" propaganda. It's nothing but a way to trick people into handing over their data. Google's data troves on users are more extensive than Facebook's. Google's economy is also, like Facebook's, based on selling ads to companies based on sharing user data. Facebook and Google are basically the same thing - exploitative megacorporations hiding behind "we're good people" propaganda.
Note that there are great non-tracking search engines out there, like Duck Duck Go, which is what I use.
5
It is hard to do, but I actually signed out of Facebook. They really make it hard to do and I am not sure I really did it. We will see.
15
@a reader
They keep your account active for 30 days while they try to lure you back into the quicksand by forwarding the messages from any groups you belonged to to your email. I just throw those in my spam folder and am counting the days.
8
Zuckerberg & Co. have good reason to behave cynically. The continually growing mass of unethical practices conducted by their company has been publicly known and documented for years. Scandals erupt once in a while, only to quickly fizzle out in a matter of months. This one will be no exception. They have collected ample evidence over time that manipulating public opinion is trivially easy if you provide a service that people actively want to use everyday, even if it's perhaps to their detriment.
Facebook itself will shrivel eventually, but the people who own it will live on and simply acquire its successors. Their grip on society will not loosen in the slightest. In fact, they've already achieved this by snapping up Whatsapp and Instagram. No wonder Zuckerberg compares himself to Augustus: there is seemingly no end to the amount of power he can acquire. Negative media coverage might come and go, but will never truly provide a threat to his interests. Some people might leave social media altogether, but they will remain the minority as the neurological need for social validation it provides is simply too great.
Ultimately, we have to accept our own responsibility. Note that before Facebook was found to have helped the Trump campaign, the liberal establishment did not seem to be too troubled by what they were up to. In a situation like this, can you really blame Facebook executives of being dismissive of our so-called moral outrage?
7
@Virgil T.
Yes, I can and do. Agreed, it's hard to shame billionaires into acting like humans, but not impossible to make it a whole lot less fun and less profitable. Let's not grant them any more power than we have to. Witness and kudos to the English parliament! Let's team up with that effort.
There is no "neurological need" for any asocial media, just laziness, herd mentality, habitual use.
4
I’ve had a bit of blu-tack adhesive over the camera on my PC for more than 20 years now. And a bit on the built-in mic as well.
8
A while back, I stuck some black electrician's tape over the camera eye on my laptop. Now, I'm realizing I also need to rest my phone sunnyside up, turning its camera to the wall. Maybe I'm paranoid, but it can't hurt, right? Of course, both can still listen in. All those ads for the Echo popping up tell me I'm not the only one who's stopped drinking the Kool Aid. We may not ultimately be able to outsmart our screens, but we can still at least try to resist.
18
@Quite Contrary Reminds me of the episode of South Park where Eric Cartman infiltrates the NSA to find out how much information they have on him. He wants them to know that he's evil and should be monitored because he's narcissistic. Later he finds out that the NSA doesn't care about him so they don't have any info on him.
He gets upset. He finds out that the NSA is using Santa Clause to "monitor" people across the globe.
@William Smith
I believe in Santa Claus in the same way I believe in corporate responsibility. Fondly nostalgic, not addressing any letters to either one.
@Quite Contrary: did you acquire a "smart" phone?
may i offer, with all due respect, that i consider your
attempt to resist a failed attempt.
We have moved from needing to heavily regulate social media companies to needing to jail their operators.
27
It's interesting that I never read anything positive about Facebook, yet it's supposed to be the future. The Climate Change Freight Train really needs to be a bullet train then if there's to be any hope for us.
6
So where's the link in the NYT article to the crucial documents released by the UK Parliamentary committee?
Here, fixed it for you:
https://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-committees/culture-media-and-sport/Note-by-Chair-and-selected-documents-ordered-from-Six4Three.pdf
22
Your attention please, Zuck is hoisted by his own petard in the UK! Couldn't happen to an ickier guy. (Well, maybe one...)
Substitute "monopoly" for "ubiquity" here and you will get a clear picture of Zuckerberg's clear intention to maintain his empire and make "real money". Billions are never going to be enough for his ilk.
The following is from an email sent by Mark Zuckerberg to several of his executives in which he explains why he does not think making users pay for Facebook would be a good idea. It is dated 19 November 2012.
Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook chief executive):
"The question is whether we could charge and still achieve ubiquity. Theoretically, if we could do that, it would be better to get ubiquity and get paid. My sense is there may be some price we could charge that wouldn't interfere with ubiquity, but this price wouldn't be enough to make us real money. Conversely, we could probably make real money of we were willing to sacrifice ubiquity, but that doesn't seem like the right trade here."
Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-46456695
7
isn’t this mark zuckerberg’s first job?
time to move on - everyone....
3
Just as I have stated over and over again as it pertains to the Facebook management, follow the $$$ as it is all that they care about!
Your personal information along with the free wheeling lies that are constantly a part of this social media network is never taken as seriously as it should be and have been.
Zuckerberg and Sandberg are nothing more than back stabbers to all of those that subscribe and participate on this platform.
Sure glad that I never fell for their spiel.
8
I highly recommend Fintan O’Toole’s column in today’s Irish Times. He says “We have created, in the digital world, an enormous disorientation machine, a great system for blurring the distinction between the real and the unreal. In its endless present tense, the past fades and the future is blurred.”
The genie is out of the bottle, so to speak, and of course these may be characteristics of the medium itself, but it is more clear than ever that we must not entrust this technology to individuals, corporations or governments who would exploit them.
8
@Hans Eckardt
As E.O.Wilson correctly stated: "We have Paleolithic emotions. We have Medieval insitutions. And on top of all that, we have developed God-like technologies. This is a dangerous mix." I might add, especially in the hands of geeks with the socio-emotional I.Q. of a soap dish and the moral fibre of a strand of spaghetti.
10
Keep on writing Hans.
1
I am thankful and envious of the privacy laws in the UK, the government there is at least trying to protect their citizens. Our leaders are buying stocks and passing laws that give the corporations more power.
23
@Cynda
I agree most of Europe is very strict of privacy laws
6
There is a shameful way that FaceBook collects info on even people who do not 'belong' -- they call them Shadow Profiles.
We all have them-- if we're in anyone's contact list, connected with any group that belongs to FB, and other connections.
It would be remarkable to find that they've missed out on any of us.
Very Serious questions should be asked about Shadow Profiles, where we have even less access to restricting, correcting our own data!!
11
@Zeke Black
Yup - if you've ever had a photo of yourself (that you did not submit, anywhere, to anyone) show up on FB you've been "tagged" by a FB user, without your knowledge or consent, as I have several times. In my estimation, you've experienced a type of identity theft, aided and abetted by Zuckerberg minions. Add to that facial recognition and you might as well submit your DNA, fingerprints or retinal image to the public domain. If there are any within this magnificent corporate mess that want to expose these methods, let them come forward and tell all, soon, please. A lot of us (even outside Congress) seem clueless about the scope of such threats. Whistleblowers may expect some plea bargains, if they act now!
5
At it's core, Facebook is a scam in which, in exchange for a a non-value-adding network platform, Facebook collects and processes user content and metadata for profit without compensation to the creators.
An appropriate analogue is a dry cleaner that charges you to clean your closes, lends them to third parties, and collects and sells both raw data and knowledge about your wardrobe, use patterns, stain history, and replacement purchasing to third parties.
4
PLEASE:
1) Stop using Facebook. The damage it's causing us is far outstripping the value in sharing your cat gifs.
2) Write to your congressional representatives. It's time to regulate these social media companies. They should stop calling themselves tech companies--they are just the newest version of media companies, and they should be regulated. Demand full disclosure on what information is collected from us and how it is used and give us the ability to limit the information.
18
I really have no concerns whatsoever about my "privacy" on Facebook. I, and only I, can post or give data to Facebook. I downloaded my entire FB history 2 months ago (yes, you can do it easily) and there was nothing in my file that if the entire world saw it it wouldn't bother me in the least.
What does concern me is the extraordinary -- and for the most part unchecked -- misinformation and lies that more nefarious FB users post. FB needs to clean up the dangerous content that poses harm to many without them even knowing it.
Buyer beware is always the case. But in FB's case you're not buying anything -- it's free. So it's up to each user to make sure what's out there on you is not a threat.
4
Do you still question whether you should stop enabling this corporation by using their platform? Lean away from Facebook and you will not regret the choice.
14
Facebook isn’t free and neither or those who choose to stay on.
10
If you are not paying for the product, you are the product.
That said, there is no privacy on the internet and less and less in the real world.
12
I think the story left out the little part about how Fakebook acts as a privatized arm of the FBI, the CIA, and your local police agency. It's all Trump's now (and Xi Jinping's, too). Isn't that grand?
9
Users should receive a reasonable trickle of income for their contributions to Facebook.
13
I’m entirely fed up with revelations regarding Facebook’s misuse of personal data but what can I do? As of now it’s indispensable to me as a tool to keep connected with friends and family around the world and until something better comes along, I’m stuck. Suffice it to say I only share information that is not what I deem “confidential” about myself and never use the platform for ANYTHING other than remaining connected to those I know, as I said. If tomorrow a better option with stronger privacy safeguards comes along, sign me up and adios Facebook.
6
@ManhattanWilliam
Curious as to how one actually remains "connected" to family and friends with whom one never shares anything "confidential". Could it be that all this safe "sharing" that passes for connection on FB is actually quite dispensible? Or have you relegated all your friends and family to that peculiarly one-dimensional category we know as "FB friends"... Personally, I treasure most highly my friends and family who refuse to use FB. And neither aid nor abet those who do.
6
@ManhattanWilliam phone calls, letters, emails
Before deleting my account I went through my friends list to make sure I had other contact information for those I truly wanted to keep one on one contact with (not just impersonal post viewing). There were about 10 total.
4
@ManhattanWilliam:
i agree with "someone":
do phone calls, letters, e-mails seem outdated to you?
remember: there was life before FB and others.
before the phone [landline] was invented
people waited for days, weeks, months, to get
the "latest" news about their loved ones.
and they were still thrilled.
1
One of the reason many people are reluctant or just incapable of giving up their Facebook account because they have been using this as a bragging tool.
Look what great vacations we took, look what great places we dined at! what wealthy friends we have etc etc!!
It is pitiful that they need this to satisfy their ego or to fill in the void for the lack of self worth they feel.
25
Facebook privacy is an oxymoron.
22
From Lean In to Obscene In: a collapse in two parts
8
Many have articulated the notion that "if you aren't paying for the product, you are the product," presumably and implicitly either to (1) defend Facebook's actions or (2) recite a conclusion that most deem settled.
If this reporting is true, however, neither of those conclusions can hold. Facebook users have, of course, "consented" to the sharing of their information, and arguably they bargained for Facebook to make a profit from sharing that information. In exchange, Facebook promises to deliver a social media platform and to use the information to benefit *its users*, not the third parties.
Here, if these facts are true, Facebook shared selected information about selected individuals to selected third parties for the sole purpose of increasing its own profits and the profits of those select third parties. This raises two concerns: (1) whether Facebook breached its user agreement by selling user data for the primary purpose of making a profit (rather than for benefiting the user experience) and (2) whether Facebook, in refusing to make such data available to any third party willing to pay the market price, violated federal and international antitrust statutes.
5
Let me check
Facebook account: no longer
Lyft (and Uber): never had one
Airbnb: nope
Netflix: I go to the cinema
Hooray!
From a millennial
36
@Manny Good for you! Want a cookie?
It is time to deliberately and consistently prepend the letter "a" to the word "social" when it is immediately followed by "media."
5
Real USA Patriots will cancel FB.
5
Does anyone believe for a second that Facebook has never sold data. Liars.
6
This company is a sadistic assault on the fundamental personal freedoms that defined both England and the 13 American colonies' commitment to protection of what they thought of as universally-acknowledged personal freedom.
It should be shut down.
6
I highly recommend reading:
"TEN ARGUMENTS FOR DELETING YOUR SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNTS RIGHT NOW"
by Jaron Lanier
Publisher: Henry Holt and Co.
12
How disingenuous for Facebook to say they've never sold their customers identities. If a bank robber gives you a bundle of his loot, and you use it to buy a Porsche, any claim of innocent bystander-hood goes bye-bye. Followed, please God, by Zuckerberg and Sandberg and their cash-register mentality.
2
This isn't a company performing vital services to people. It subsists on those foolish enough to freely hand over personal information. It's a publicly traded company and like any publicly traded company its goal is to maximize shareholder value. Anybody who actually believed in Facebook's mantra needs to take a good look in the mirror. Facebook isn't the problem; the problem is the person in the mirror.
90
If you sat in a room and tried to think up a dystopian future that was monitored by a callous, amoral corporation that sought to monetize your private information, you would arrive at a product that looked exactly like Facebook. I seriously think we are mere weeks away from Facebook itself releasing compromising messenger chats of regulators and elected representatives that are trying to reign it in...as yourself, do you seriously believe they wouldn't dump messages to destroy the credibility of people that are seeking to reign it in. Every little errant flirtatious comment, every 2 AM mistake that a 22 yo kid made...they have it and will stop at nothing to retain their position as the only point of entry to a vast database of private information.
Moving forward, when we consider the ashes of this behemoth, we will need to learn from what we allowed to emerge from the dark id of the Internet so we don't let another company like this happen.
23
Why is anybody surprised with this?
This is what FB does and how they make lots of money.
If you haven't deleted your FB account yet, you haven't been paying attention and deserve what's coming.
Ain't no such thing as a free lunch. Not in this country.
6
Facebook has been weaponized by data miners, dodgy app developers, hate groups, totalitarian governments and far too many people providing way too much information, so why stop when there's so much money to be made?
The only way to stem this growing cancer,besides anti trust legislation, is the fact kids today increasingly view FB as something for old people to use. For now that is the only saving grace.
11
Majority of Facebook users are very happy with the product. One day the Times will write a positive article. Has The NY Times ever found anything interesting or productive about Facebook?
I deleted my (only used the first month I had it) Facebook account a few months ago. I have no respect left for this "kid" who repeatedly lies about his company's dealings. Too many excuses and continued deception.
3
British Parliament has a crazy government that compromised the English citizenry with their need to leave from Europe. Look how their property prices are falling , companies are leaving , and they still talk about the boring Royalty. Pretty soon total confidence will be lost in the English government and of course they are upset with Facebook for they want to give Facebook a monetary fine. They are jealous of US technology firms. Just tell us how much you want? Can’t hear you .
Mr. Zuckerberg is revealed for the deceptive leader he is. His credibility is now at the lowest. Facebook won't thrive again until he recuses himself for any part of its operation. Massive change at the top echelons of Facebook is necessary.
Perhaps he should have studied harder and taken a few ethics courses at Harvard.
5
Delete your Facebook account. These people are not interested in really protecting your data.
4
I left Facebook on the night of the election...simply out of disgust. Little did I know the depths of Facebook’s depravity. I’m a 49 year-old father of two young boys. It’s been my mission to keep my kids away from social media and minimize screen time. Play catch! Ride a bike! Play a musical instrument! Learn to cook! Actually call or write your Grandparents! I am 100% convinced my children will live long(er) and health(ier) lives avoiding Facebook and Twitter.
10
Facebook users are the product that is bought and sold. Facebook destroying democracy one click at a time while stuffing their pockets with rubles and riyals. Nothing special about Zuckerberg or Sandberg just more grifters on the take.
6
The U.S. President is clearly missing both the opportunity to hire a great ambassador of Trumpism and a soul bro' in Zuckerberg.
The two founded empires that have made them billions and run like cash registers. They're amoral leaders who monetize every transaction, caring not who they hurt among the hundreds of millions of people each is assigned to protect. They sit in isolated bubbles, thinking up ways to wreak vengeance on their perceived tormentors: for the president, Mueller is just the start; for Zuckerberg, it's privacy advocates and pro-regulation forces.
Of course, both hate George Soros. (BTW: They're seconds are also scary dudes, Sandberg and Pence.) As for us innocent, exposed stooges, we should seek our own revenge; both Z. and T. must go, together I'd hope. And please let me add, "Hasta la vista, babies!"
3
One more piece of evidence to add to a long list of user-beware facts about Facebook exposed since 2016. Mr. Zuckerman's responses are similar to those of Mr. Individual #1 when caught in a lie: deny, deflect, say in effect, "everybody does it." And when he finally says he's taken steps to correct problems, you find out later that it was mostly window dressing. Glad I deleted my Facebook account back when he used "freedom of speech" to defend the use of his platform by Russia to meddle in the election; and by home-grown hate-mongers to spread bogus conspiracy theories, distortions of history, and outright lies to spread fear, racism or misogyny. I don't miss it at all!
10
Trouble is, Facebook creates harm, even for those who never use it. Watch the Frontline reports if you don't know about their role in Myanmar, for example. Not to mention our elections.
Regulation is the only way to prevent for-profit entities from creating harm as a by-product of their businesses. We stop businesses from dumping chemicals into our water and we don't let AT&T eavesdrop on our phone calls for profit. We should be able to stop all tech companies from dumping toxic falsehoods into our public conversations, and exploiting our private lives for profit.
19
@Cheryl Woodard
I am not so sure that we actually stop companies from dumping chemicals in our water. Here in PA, fracking water is released into the watershed.
The phone companies may not eavesdrop your calls for profit, but they do profit from the metadata regarding calls.
Only the wealthy and corporations, now that they are "people" as of Citizens United, can afford privacy.
1
Almost every day there is a new story about Facebook's misappropriation of user data. The solution is for everyone to stop using Facebook (I don't as I don't trust them), especially businesses that have links. I know people who have cancelled their accounts and established web pages instead.
Why must Europe save us? Why can't we be proactive and do it ourselves?
6
Few people actually understand the business model underlying Facebook and similar services. Simply put, Facebook offers a "free" social information sharing service in exchange for the data they will collection when you use the service. They then sell that data to many other companies for add targeting, market research, political activities and more. Data mining techniques are used to extract clusters of information used for numerous research purposes.
Facebook provides a privacy policy and many ways you can limit what is collected and therefor sold. What they hope is that you don't read and understand the policy or want to deal with the tedious process of setting your privacy options.
But you made a deal. You bought into the service in exchange for the information you post using the service. How else did you think they were going to make any money!
"Privacy" is a slippery concept when it comes to on-line social services. Is your personal name, address and other vital figures masked so you are simply represented by a number for marketing targeting purposes? If so, like medical database system protecting patient information, then your "privacy" is protected.
There is no way to protect us against many ways these services can be misused. No way, except by better preparing our children in how reason, understand and recognize what these services can do for good and for bad.
6
@Larry Milask
I thought of one small way to befuddle FB's grand plan to monetize my data and target me. In my profile, I changed my gender and subtracted a few decades from my birth date, which I also re-engineered. Let their customers beware of millenial males in sheep's clothing.
2
Citizens are in a Catch 22. They can't do business without using the Internet, and if they use most Internet applications they must first give away all privacy and intellectual property rights. In the old west they called it horse theft and stagecoach robbery--both hanging offenses. A few rows of hanged bodies, allowed to remain until the vultures pick their bones clean, might send Silicon Valley a lesson. And I'm usually opposed to capital punishment! But I am even more opposed to corporate blackmail--and this is a perfect example.
6
A first step would be strict honest-privacy option backed by law. According to many internet companies, that would mean dropping customers who selected the strict honest-privacy option.
The spin is that dropping those customers is a tragedy for those customers. Actually, it is fear of losing a monopoly position.
Therefore a legally required strict privacy option could quite possibly achieve the same effect as anti-trust legislation, but with far less government expense and mess. The end result would be one where consumers are much better served.
4
@Craig H.
If you read the UK documents, it seems FB has calibrated their mobile app upgrades with the use agreement; seeing that users are less amenable to frequent upgrades because it involves agreeing to a new use agreement. Thus, they carefully time upgrades to maximize their ability to delete or add to that lengthy, incomprehensible agreement without attracting unwanted user attention. Thus are they able to slip in unseen new ways to monetize more of our data. A bit of high tech hocus pocus worthy of any snake oil salesman. Hiding in plain sight, arrogant tricksters.
2
Failed America needs to adopt Europe's privacy laws yesterday.
In May 2018, Europe implemented the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) law that sets high standards of personal data privacy across Europe for collecting, storing or processing user information belonging to EU nationals.
Every company that has European users must comply with GDPR standards.
Facebook responded by moving more than 1.5 billion non-European Facebook users users out of reach of the European privacy law, despite a (fake) promise from Mark Zuckerberg to apply the “spirit” of the legislation globally.
Facebook shifted the terms of responsibility for all users in the US, Canada and outside the EU from its international HQ in Ireland to its main offices in California.
Those users will now be governed by weaker US law rather than the stronger EU privacy law.
Once again, America's government defers to shameless, amoral grifters rather than the citizens it should be protecting.
America's right-wing, corporate-run government is backward and corrupt behind description.
Delete Facebook today.
Demand that Congress enact Europe's privacy laws and represent American citizens, not America's shameless, amoral corporate grifters and nihilists.
The new American Congress also needs to delete Facebook and Silicon Valley from their corrupt campaign coffers and offer campaign finance corruption reform.
America's failing state needs radical reform in representative government.
52
"Your privacy is the most important thing and will be protected".
Lying Mark Zuckerberg. Of course, he's continally "sorry". Apparenlty that's the BIG tech approach - lie today and when you're caught say "sorry".
The solution is to claw back all the wealth facebook, corporate leaders and BIG investors have taken since facebook went mainstream and put them out of business. Now would be the perfect time.
10
If Facebook's business model is advertising (it is), and they make revenue from selling hyper-targeted ads based on user data...then they are "monetizing" private data, which in essence, is just another way of "selling" it.
5
Throw the entire library at them. In health care I am owner of the information collected on me, I should be able to charge for its use.
3
Using FB to share articles with friends is easier than sending each a separate e-mail and link. Beyond that I have no use for the service.
And my data? Who is that? What is being sold is complete misinformation. I saw my facebook data and had a good laugh. My only interest listed was Necromancy, and a woman I lived with in the 1970s is listed as my sister (I'm an only).
1
Tech companies built around the use of sensitive data of the public should by law, open itself up to inspection and provide a curtain level of transparency in how it operates. They should not be allotted the same opacity as traditional business that do not profit from personal insights of it's users.
5
Wouldn't this be an anti-trust violation? If you're colluding to eliminate competition, then massive fines and/or a breakup are in order.
Of course, with the current administration, anything, including "nothing to see here" is possible.
8
America needs to look to Europe for how to handle digital privacy rights. That's even more important when we have out-of-touch senators like Orrin Hatch who asked Mark Zuckerberg "how does Facebook make its money."
Step 1: Elect legislators who have some clue how the Internet works, and who care about privacy rights.
Step 2: Have those legislators follow the British lead and hold Congressional hearings, demanding social media internal documents, and holding longer, more aggressive hearings with Zuckerberg, Sandberg, and others.
Step 3: Pass sweeping privacy rights legislation modeled on what has happened in Europe.
Will any of that happen here? Not for the foreseeable future, given predictable corporate protections by the metastasized version of what used to be the Republican Party.
15
I am struggling to figure out what everyone is so upset about. I've had an online presence since 1991 when I bought my first desktop computer and signed up with CompuServe. I've been a daily user on Facebook since 2008. If Facebook has been selling information to Lyft, Air BNB and others, how do I know the effects? I haven't been flooded with email from any of them. My telephone isn't ringing off the hook with sales calls and special offers. The US Postal Service hasn't been working overtime on my behalf delivering junk mail from them. Then again, I don't use Facebook for shopping. I don't use Facebook for playing games or for figuring out which historical figures resemble my own personality. Facebook is not my primary source for news and information. Facebook "friendship" isn't a numbers game for me; I only have 60 and most are my family. What am I doing wrong? What am I supposed to be angry about?
2
@Don Stubbs Uh, let's see, a gigantic corporation couldn't possibly do anything bad with access to the personal data of many hundreds of millions of people, which they can choose to share or not with any other gigantic corporation in order to advance their own business. Did I get that right?
3
I deleted by Facebook account after Zucky said "Holocaust denial was just another point of view". Yet I still kept getting 'friend' requests. Read the small print. If you have any other sites or blogs linked to Facebook, accessing them MIGHT automatically reopen your Facebook account. You might have to a little more work to lance that Facebook boil.
12
"Never sold people's data"?..
Are they delusional?
If you're this rich you can say anything?
And up is down. Right is left. Wrong is right. Right?
11
@Billy
I suppose FB only "rented" our data, thereby allowing them to keep their greedy fist tightly secured around both the sensitive organs of both their corporate customers and the rest of us, cluelessly chewing our cud in the FB milking parlor. By renting instead of selling our data, they could slice and dice it, custom package it for max profit and simultaneously repurpose it for other customers. Clever business plan, eh? We are an infinitely sustainable, renewable and carbon-free raw material for the slumlords of Sleazacon Valley. The sky's not even the limit, just ask Mr. Musk...
1
@Billy: alt-right even. at times.
If we’re being brutally honest, Facebook is tantamount to being a Fascist Dictatorship! And all online, with its slimy tentacles permeating every country with internet connection! It’s high time the people of the world woke up to Zuckerberg, who has gotten away with shafting friends, colleagues and the planet because of his “babyface”! Enough of this rubbish!!!!
10
This is another example of how misguided some people are when they worry about government invasion of your privacy when big business has been doing it for years. Worse, businesses' data bases are routinely being hacked, sending your personal information to criminals seeking to steal your identity and your money.
141
My credit cards can be canceled. While it would be a major task, my identity if lost from a business hack such as passport, drivers license or SSN numbers, can be reassigned. My person, which is an amalgamation of my decisions, my likes, my friends, my follows, my politics, my reads, my personal answers in free surveys or games (a la Cambridge Analytica), etc. can not be unseen or regained.
I'n under 50, but I have never been a member of Facebook or Instagram, which they actively hide is now another division of FB. They scared me from day one. If you're comfortable with giving away the essence of your person and allowing companies to amass databases of who you are, and using or selling it in order to market to you, often insidiously, have at it.
Someone asked earlier why European Parliament needs to rescue us in the US from our own devices when we continue to allow these companies to do what they do. It's because our politicians won't go against the flow of money, start to ask the right questions, and make the right decisions for our country and our people.
Add to that the future of net neutrality and allowing our Internet providers to collect and sell virtually all of our Internet activity, and it can get significantly worse unless Congress gets to the bottom of what Facebook, Google, and others are doing and works to reign in and correct it.
18
@Emergence - don't be naive. Go ahead and fear the government misusing data too. Anyone who has your data had most likely abused it, misused it, or lost it to hackers.
And that will continue as long as their is a buck to be made. Privatize profit, socialize cost.
4
Paging Jim Neighbors, to say in his best Gomer Pyle voice, "Surprise, surprise, surprise."
9
Time for a sequel to “The Social Network!”
7
Here's how to delete some or all of your facebook posts without deleting your account: https://www.imore.com/how-delete-your-facebook-data
Because honestly, once you've put it out there, your friends have seen it, and it has scrolled off the screen, do you really need it on there any more? All it is at that point is a treasure trove for advertisers or Russians trying to purchase your brain.
2
@Andy, Not completely sure about this but my guess is that although you can't access your deleted post doesn't mean that someone else can't. Those pesky 0s and 1s don't scrub out. Ever.
1
Zuckerman doesn't have "what's good for you" in mind, and never did.
9
The best things in life are free
But you can keep 'em for the birds and bees
Now give me money (that's what I want)
That's what I want (that's what I want)
That's what I want (that's what I want) yeah
That's what I want
5
How was Facebook to manage the mountains of data it was accumulating on users during a period of explosive growth? Easily: put a price tag on it and put it up for sale to the highest bidders.
4
When you see "Facebook" in the headline of an article you know that the news is going to make them look even worse than before.
5
I am mystified by the fact that whenever news of Facebook abusing access to it’s users’ information, people complain and “tear their clothes” over it, but never decide cancel their FB account. Facebook is not only unnecessary, it is -in my view- one of the most damaging companies ever founded. Facebook will continue to use and abuse its power and access to information, Don’t like this fact? For crying out loud close your FB account!!
37
Some of the kids already did this - but they went to Instagram. Is that any better?
So they are no different than any other major company, so much for social consciousness.
3
If you aren't paying for the product, you are the product.
269
@Bryce
Agreed. But I've been saying it this way: Facebook serves subscribers the way butchers serve cattle.
17
@Bryce
We ARE paying for the product - with our time, energy and by allowing ourselves to be bombarded with ads. FB should be paying it's users for 1) the space we allow them to occupy on our screens, and 2) for the content we generate, attracting other eyeballs to their podium. The business model needs to be modified to accommodate the actual value equation.
1
@Bryce
Agreed. Facebook is an easy target, but they are not the only ones that do this. You can't say Facebook should be held responsible without also holding ALL other online entities responsible. If people read the terms and conditions they sign, they would have known about this from the very beginning. But, people are quick to place blame for things in which they've feel they've been slighted regardless of their own actions (or inactions).
5
The only "baseless" thing here is that Zuckerberg et al assumed that purchasing legislators and other officials in California would shield them from scrutiny in the rest of the world. The arrogance is typical of the silicon valley kleptocrats.
8
This can't be! 99 percent of FB, Google and the rest of Silicon Valley went blue in 2016.
We've been told time and again by this paper that the blue people are the caring, moral ones.
It's almost as if the Valley's Progressive rhetoric and political donations were cover for their tax-dodging, privacy-invading monopolies!
Good thing the media has been so hard on them.
Oh wait...
7
@Expatico - In 2106 Google's PAC spent 55% R vs 45% D.
https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?cycle=2018&strID=C00428623
Select "Party Split By Cycle"
Facebook didn’t “sell” users data: they just gave it to people who gave them money.
10
@Tim Hunter
Indeed, it was simply an historic confluence of interests in forcing people to come together and communicate ... in the interest of international peace and harmony.
1
Wait, isn't Reed Hastings (CEO of Netflix) on Facebook's board??
1
”But the facts are clear: we’ve never sold people’s data.” - Oh, Facebook, if we could only believe you. You've sold our data to Cambridge Analytica. And data is what you sell to advertisers to make your business profitable.
The lies, the backtracking, and the apologies from Facebook have been so numerous and repeated now, I would be more surprised to find an instance when they've told the truth.
5
Remember this saying from the dotcom 1.0 days:. If you're not paying to use a product, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT.
11
Let he who is with out sin cast the first scone....boomers!
We allowed television to raise our children because it was convenient...
what did you think they would learn?
that the end justifies the means? that anything goes as long as you get the money?
that what you don't know won't hurt you?
Are we not responsible for the people our children have turned out to be?
Just wondering?
2
@JeffP3456 It wasn't boomers who first raised their kids on TV, it was the boomers' parents.
1
@JeffP3456
Television and even radio (at least in their early days) caused families to tune in/watch together, perchance to even interact in real time, 3D. It was also heavily regulated, compared to asocial media, which has suffered virtually no limitations. So, what's your point? Boomers are the most adversely affected by the current situation - reviled for our tech illiteracy and yet able to recall the golden age of tech innocence.
1
"But the facts are clear..." that Facebook indeed HAS sold users' private data. No doubt. And it apparently continues. Is there anything that this company does not lie about???
2
I find impressing that Facebook still is a major tech gigant without responsabilities being addressed with the permission of governments around the world. This has been a really bitter year for Facebook users. There's no more trust in the social network. I have been cutting access and changing Facebook as credential with Google plataform, which in the end the concetration of data is still a problem now.
There should be the link of the 250 pages document released by the British Parliament for readers knowledge.
3
These revelations are only the tip of the iceberg.
Google provides free searches. Gmail is without cost. Services like Yelp and Trip Advisor gives free reviews of all sorts of services. No one pays for a Facebook account.
But nothing in life is free. I think it was sci-fi writer Robert Heinlein who popularized the acronym TANSTAAFL (There ain't no such thing as a free lunch). The ways in which many major technology firms monetize their "free" offerings are often opaque, and if publicized would shock many of us.
That said, there are many others who probably wouldn't be bothered at all.
3
Facebook needs to be shut down or severely limited. I've stopped using Facebook and my life is just fine. Try Slack. It's more private and very easy to use. Hopefully it won't end up as corrupted as Facebook. Consumers can change how Facebook operates if we find it important enough. Do we?
1
@Linda
Or, try, instead of thumb-typing on a touch screen, dialing a 10-digit number assigned to an individual('s) phone and speaking directly into yours. Yes, I know it's hard to believe, but communication is possible by doing just that.
1
@Glen Good point.
1
To use many apps like Facebook we must click Agree to activate the app, permitting them to share our personal data with 'partners'. A simple requirement would be that they notify us each time they share our data with any such partner. Imagine a window on the Facebook homepage that lists each time they share your data with Uber, Air BNB, or Cambridge Analytica.
Telling us in general that they are going to do something is not the same as telling us exactly what they are doing. What they are doing is sharing our data with strangers of their choosing for their own profit. That isn't criminal in the US, although it now is in Europe, but it should be.
15
Time to break them up. Facebook is not to be trusted yet again. They operate without restrictions and face no repercussions no matter how egregious their actions turn out to be. Break them up.
3
There isn't anything about this story that should frustrate users of Facebook; rather, advertisers whose data access was restricted earlier this year should be annoyed by this revelation. Facebook already had this data on its users, it simply wasn't sharing it with everyone — only Netflix, Airbnb and Lyft, apparently.
After advertisers were told they were losing a good chunk of their data-targeting capabilities (thanks to Cambridge Analytica), Facebook made it seem like that was just the new standard on their platform. Well, it looks like if you were a huge company, like those mentioned in the story, you still had an all-access pass to it.
Really though, there's nothing about this story that should be upsetting users. It had nothing to do with data misuse so much as it did with giving preferential treatment to bigger brands/advertisers that Facebook didn't view as competition to their vision.
7
@Greg It mystifies me that so many jump on the Hate FB bandwagon when their use of FB has not been affected. Our "data" where ever we shop on line or use a creditor debit card is out there but these folks seem to be like sheep following the sheep herders of hate.
Greg, you remind me of Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) who asked the following of Mark Zuckerberg, "How do you sustain a business model in which users don’t pay for your service?” A man who was charged with getting to the bottom of the Facebook data breach and its amassing of power, didn't even understand the first thing of how the company worked.
i'm not sure you understand the depth of information they collect, and how they use and monetize that information, and moreover what it could mean for individuals.
2
Facebook and others have taken capitialism's worst elements and used them as their business model -- deception, lying, corruption.
What happened to the business model where customers (us) pay for the services we use and advertisers pay for exposure (which is clearly noted on the displays)?
What would users pay for Facebook's services? What pricing model would be needed to make the company profitable, but not outrageously so?
3
How can anybody be shocked by what facebook or almost any big business will do anymore in its quest for a buck.
7
Some people complain. A few of us eschew "social media" altogether. But most Americans are so eager to be entertained, distracted, and "liked" that they will continue to shoot up with FB and similar drugs. They are all too happy to believe that such platforms are "connecting" them to others, "enhancing" their lives and making some things more convenient. Sadly, I think that people would line up to trade their right to vote for "free" online entertainment. Even those who bother to read articles like this one generally shrug and say, "If they want to gather info about me, what do I care? My life is boring!" Critical thinking and analyzing long-term consequences are boring, difficult processes that few have the time or inclination for when "followers" and "friends" are offering a fix. But I'm an old fuddy-duddy.
42
@ARNP
Yes, but...for a brief moment, the development of the internet promised a way to connect people for purposes far more serious and nobler than cat photos, vacation brags or commercial advertising. FB rapidly captured a monopolistic position and from that driver's seat came to dictate the way people viewed, used and talked about this "natural resource". We used to understand that the airwaves were a limited commodity, thus licensed and regulated them accordingly. The irony is that with much greater bandwidth, we have accepted so much less diversity of ways we interact on the internet. It's currently the Wild West - lawless, dangerous and enter at your own risk.
The limits and legitimate fears around privacy, hacking, influence and disinformation we now experience are not technological, but market-based, human-controlled. As H.L. Mencken correctly stated, "Nobody ever went broke by underestimating the intelligence of the American people". Or P.T. Barnum: "There's a sucker born every minute." We've been had, bigtime. Fixing it is a tall order, requiring global cooperation. Good luck to us!
Facebook was never about "connecting friends". This is corporate lore for a company that follows in the steps of junk mail marketers.
Before the internet, junk mail companies accumulated data on people: name, address, type of junk mail they've responded to before, built lists, and sold them to people who wanted to market via junk mail. It's very inexpensive to buy data, and a 2% return in sales is considered good.
Zuckerberg sat in that college dorm room, using junk mail as a model, and dreamed of "connectedness", via internet data, as a means to personal wealth.
He succeeded at that, but, the amount of influential power held in Facebook's data, and how it's been used to change elections and promulgate propaganda, how it's sold indiscriminately, shows the company could easily commit treason.
The company's a powerful and irresponsible monopoly. It needs to be broken up, perhaps by each country it operates in, and have independent, non-political regulation and auditing of its sales. It needs to obey the laws of each country it works in, including privacy laws.
No "likes" for Facebook today.
20
About one week ago I logged out of my Facebook account and haven’t viewed it since then. The addition is strong, but I have filled my time with reading articles in NYT and books that have been sitting on my bedside table for years, as well as socializing more with my kids and spouse.
Facebook keeps emailing me to tell what I am missing...I wish I could email back them back and tell them how much I am gaining. Give it try - go cold turkey. There is a whole world out there!
40
@RP
But you're not going to close your account? Or just taking a break? Just curious.
1
It's hard to believe that money wasn't involved between facebook, a profit motivated enterprise, and these other companies, also profit motivated enterprises. If the motivation was securing a monopoly position, that on its face is a money making proposition: The data was sold.
1
Time for the Facebook senior executives to testify before EXPERT Congressional panels (who will know about what questions to ask) and to do the same before EU and UK regulatory bodies.
They've gotten away with this far too long - with impunity.
21
Anyone who is surprised at the facts contained in this story and other stories about Facebook has to be utterly naive. I don't mean to be insulting, but come on. With Facebook, you have always been the product. If you thought otherwise, then you shouldn't be using social media.
7
Ethics are ethics. Same goes for lack of ethics. The product could be sugary cola, cigarettes, or a social platform.
1
No one should be either surprised or except anything different from an unregulated company with unrestricted access to their users data when that user pays $0 for use.
2
This is what happens when unethical people run a business that is unregulated. It's no surprise to me.
What is a surprise to me is people still look at me like I am CRAZY when I tell them I am not on Facebook anymore. Is it crazy to protect myself and stand up for what is right or to continue to have my personal information used and abused just to look at selfies all day?
9
You mean a giant corporation will do anything it can get away with to increase profit and market share, even though its PR is a never-ending tsunami of well-focus-grouped consent manufacture among important target audiences?
Wow, it's almost as if corporations, underneath all the hoo-hah, have only two intimately related goals: increased profit and market share. I mean, no matter what their CEOs, et al, might privately want to do--for the world, their country, their children, their grandchildren.
That's really-existing capitalism, folks: it warps capitalists as well as workers, managers, etc. You think the CEO of Exxon--any CEO, ever, since the 70s, along with all of upper management--doesn't know his business is helping to destroy the possibility for decent life on the planet? Of course. But if he (I presume it's a he now; could be wrong) acted against his fiduciary responsibility, he'd be out on his ear.
But it's naive to say that we'll have to somehow undermine the holy search for profit and market share. Adults in the room know that the only mature option is to hurtle toward total disaster. No matter what it does to their children. Whom, of course, they love. Not sarcastic: I'm certain they do.
9
"We've never sold people's data". We did, of course, give it away to friends and family and random Russian bot farms. Oh, and passers-by so as to be their pals and get their business. But no actual money changed hands for the data itself, so, you know, not "sold." What a silly idea.
These guys sound like 8 year olds explaining why there's blueberry jam all over their faces. Definitely not up the challenge of managing a company of any size. Shake it up, or shut 'er down.
105
Disgusting. We need to follow the European model and regulate the use of our private information.
126
Zuckerman: "The facts are clear: we’ve never sold people’s data."
Typical Facebook "facts" spin.
"Sold people's data" as in "you paid us money so we'll give you access to people's data" — maybe not.
"Sold people's data" as in "you spent money advertising so we'll give you access to people's data" — probably.
"Sold people's data" as in "you help us build our stranglehold on social media so we'll give you access to people's data" — oh yes!
59
I have begun to suspect the employment possibilities of anyone who has ever worked for Facebook. It is a scarlet letter in my book. And sign that you do not have a moral compass. And can not be trusted to tell the truth. Facebook is subversive and anti-democratic and should be regulated. Even Apple Inc. says we need regulation and laws.
35
“If you’re not paying for it, you’re not the customer; you’re the product.”
14
Please. Please tell me why, after all the revelations made about Facebook's abuse of personal data, does anyone in his or her right mind continue to use the site?!
59
Sheryl Sandberg, feminist icon, clearly did not "lean in" to protect the privacy of women Facebook users, even though she was already a billionaire.
Remember her the next time the Times runs its monthly opinion piece on women executives being more sensitive to people issues than male executives. In corporate rat races to the top, the winners, male or female, are always rats.
110
DSM whatever - what an incredibly ignorant comment. So Cheryl Sandberg turned out to play the historically male win-at-all- cost strategy. Shame on her. But women are so vastly underrepresented in the top realms of, well everything. She does not represent the professional ethics of women. My bet is that the vast majority of women are sickened by her behavior, not encouraged to follow her lead.
@Bailey Although normally I would not respond to namecalling trolls, I will make an exception for you. Where is any evidence supporting "My bet is that the vast majority of women are sickened by her behavior, not encouraged to follow her lead." The claim for decades has been that female leaders will make companies kinder, gentler and more ethical. It is incredibly ignorant to think that their being "wildly undrerepresented in the top realms" means that changing that will reduce corporate greed or duplicity.
"Facebook Gave Some Companies Special Access to Users’ Data..."
SHOCKING, simply shocking.
They make their money by SELLING YOU OUT.
I'm NOT OK with that.
You?
12
".....We never sold people's data"...
Semantics. We simply gave it to the highest bidder.
29
I can imagine a headline in the future. It would say something like this: “Satan Reveals He IS Facebook.”
Sadly, Facebook is so entrenched in our culture people would still use it. As a matter fact I think I’m using it right now. I don’t believe in Satan, but I do believe in the pure evil of unfettered greed, and the worship of Capitalism. Facebook “leaders” have no moral compass.
6
Seems the old adage of "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me," applies here. As does the "If you lie with dogs, you are going to get fleas."
If you continue with FB don't complain - you have been fully warned about the dangers and abuses.
17
That does it. Time to regulate.
15
Unbelievable!!! Facebook is welling to "share" their information with companies they fell can be beneficial to their advantage; but when it comes to national security and our safety, FB want to make the government jump through hoops before they are willing to cooperate.
7
Who ever suggested Facebook could be trusted? The song Money epitomizes their corruption. They are disgusting.
6
Both the "bergs" need to be ousted or fined mightily where it hits them most--their bank account. That greedy, unconscionable duo can issue all the apologies they want but it won't undo all the damage their "Frankenbook" creation has done to the world.
13
Thanks to the folks who unearthed the truth about FB. When are regulators going to protect us?!?
17
@Bonnie Regulations! That is hated liberalism- communism- socialism kind of dangerous talk! Next we'll be like Europeans, with decent public schools and universal health care.
3
One more reason to get out of Facebook and start talking to each other face to face...
6
Perhaps not that surprising that "Big Brother" would arrive in the form of Facebook, superficially friendly while stealing your soul.
12
Facebook has created the atmosphere of mistrust around the globe by their continued immoral and unethical practices. Do we leave Facebook or do we demand that they be closely regulated? One fact is certain - I will never spend one more dime on FB ads.
7
Never thought I'd see the day when GOOGLE of all companies would seem the most ethical of all the data-collection companies.
3
@Sean Or at least the most cautious.
1
What to do with the mountains of customer info Facebook had gathered? Turn it over to favored advertisers who raised Facebook's revenue. Now spam and other sewage plague the social media and political discourse in the country. Trump's crew specialized in abusing Facebook to their advantage.
14
Any entity whose business model is based upon divulging information about its customers without their knowledge and approval, needs a new business model. Period.
119
I agree. Netflix pay attention because when Apple and Disney start their own streaming services, you will be dropped by many, if not marginalized.
10
"Divulging without their knowledge?" They make it pretty clear in their times of service what they do with your information. Perhaps if most people actually read the terms of use instead of just agreeing without reading, it would not come as such a shock to everyone.
4
@James Taylor Yeah, like the credit reporting agencies. Equifax and their huge breach come to mind. It's about time the citizenry wises up.
1
Despite this handing over of data dating back to 2015, both Sandberg & Zuckerman never take full responsibility or admit the full picture. As with so much we see today, it all boils down to overwhelming greed & power.
Europe holds social media companies to a higher standard than the US. This must change. Both these key players must go.
Time for real transparency & an end to the neverending greed of Facebook.
An even smarter idea is to encourage people to delete their FB accounts & move forward.
Facebook has done more than enough damage.
83
Auto correct & I missed it- *Zuckerberg!
@Susan LaDuke
I strongly suspect that most FB users, while put off by the data sharing, aren't so upset that they will seriously even consider a brief separation, much less a divorce. That would have happened en masse by now if it was in the American character. It is not.
3
People should not forget the role Facebook in particular has had with spreading disinformation online. Zuckerberg thinks he’s above the law- he was asked to appear here before Parliament THREE TIMES and he ignored them. Until Damian Collins held someone in custody until he released the information he had on Facebook.
The information was sealed under a California court’s jurisdiction.....but London isn’t in California! And although Zuckerberg tried to get the files back and make them not publicised, he’s learnt how we do things here in the U.K. when someone gives us the runaround! And believe me, there are plenty more juicy tidbits to come from the huge amount of data Collins was handed.
This all goes to show how complicit and involved Facebook have been in distorting information and selling the data on its users! Coupled with the sleazy and immoral Sandberg Episode, people should vote with their feet- or cursors- and boycott Facebook. OR create bogus accounts with NO PERSONAL INFO. Like mine!
145
@Jase Baxter
Better yet, create accounts full of false info. Let the FB corporate customers chew on that. Fight fire with fire.
2
@Jase Baxter Thank you, UK!
Regulate the tech companies. All of them. Regulate them till their eyes bleed. If it "stifles innovation," so be it. We might discover that we can live without most of this stuff anyway.
285
So facebook "never sold people's data". But did they give companies access to users' data, not necessarily in exchange for money? That's what they need to clarify instead of just saying that the allegation is misleading and just one part of the story. Facebook should be transparent and therefore tell the whole story as it is in order to prove their point. Calling a lawsuit "baseless" is not enough when documents exist revealing that these discussions and transactions took place.
50
How many more times can this possibly occur? What do people need to happen before they start to leave Facebook in droves.
142
@Carl
Apparently people don't know or care.
3
What would it take for conscientious Facebook users to delete their accounts?
I deleted mine back in 2008.
61
Is Zuckerberg even a U.S. citizen, anymore?
Didn't he bail on his country in order to make money, avoid taxes, and compromise the privacy of his customers?
34
@Brandon
You're probably remembering articles around 2012 regarding Eduardo Saverin, another Facebook founder who had extensive legal disputes with Zukerberg a few years prior to Saverin's renouncing his US citizenship.
I don't have reason to believe this was your intention, but your post could have the effect of creating/spreading an inflammatory rumor. Search engines make it fairly easy to fact-check yourself and answer your question before posting it.
-DB
7
Sometimes I get tired of saying it; but still it needs to be said.
Delete. Your. Account. Unshackle thyself. Meet your friends and family IRL, or, if not possible, on the telephone device.
Don’t wait for the next revelation of how Facebook has misused your data. You can’t correct wrongs already committed but you can at least slow the hemorrhaging.
189
@T. Rivers
Facebook and its predecessors and ilk have always scared me. It never seemed to me like a good idea to spread oneself around that way. But then I'm an old lady with a flip top phone I never turn on.
18
@T. Rivers
But why, oh why is this so difficult for mindful, thoughtful, aware, educated, forward-thinking friends to consider..?
My old college friends have banned "the F word" discussions from our gatherings, so passionate have my protests become in the face of their resistance to quitting FB. My family members are equally defiant, clinging to their inane FB addictions.
Despite its encouragement of deadly tribalism between Americans & Myanmar's citizens, its wholesale sellout to Cambridge Analytica & its swaying of a US election, the numbers of those declining to delete FB, in my personal orbit alone, are astounding to me.
I'm just a retired teacher, by no means a business person, but it seems like the Frankenstein created by Zuckeberg, et al was truly an ingenius product, addicting even the most educated & wordly-wise among us to this despicable beast.
Fo the love of God, delete Facebook. Now.
14
@T. Rivers I joined FB when I was 17, heading to college. 13 years later I've deleted it (it will be "fully deleted" on Christmas Day, how nice).
Not only have these NYT investigations convinced me to do so, but it was just an overall realization that I do not want my entire adult life to be stored, reviewable, and manipulated by and for others.
One week after requesting a delete, I've already noticed that I have more brain space for other things. I can contact specific people if I need to - the mass posts are impersonal and erodes real connection.
Will it convince my friends and family to do so also? Honestly, I doubt it. But I feel better.
12
Apparently Trump is not unique -- lies and acting illegally to make money appear to be widespread through our society, with no pretense that our society is unique in that regard. Yes, the swamp must be drained, but DC is a product of a much broader malaise. If we are to maintain our traditional values, much needs to be examined and rectified.
24
In normal times, with a normal Congress and a normal executive, Facebook's top officers would immediately be removed from the company.
Someone in government needs to stand up and get Zuckerberg and Sandberg out of there now.
They've lied and continued to do as they please.
Basta.
---
Things Trump Did While You Weren’t Looking https://wp.me/p2KJ3H-2ZW
45