Mark Zuckerberg:
It's the last half of your statement that is correct—"We don't deserve to serve you".
1
There'e no such thing as a free lunch!
Something we have forgotten and it is teaching us a painful lesson.
Look at adds all over television. Buy this and we'll throw in all this special stuff for free. Sometimes the free stuff adds up to more than they are asking us to pay for the item they are peddling.
If we had a government agency allowed our personal information to be abused as Zuckerberg has done we would consider hanging the official from a street lamp. And most of it goes back to Reagan. "The government is the problem"
1
Facebook violated NO existing law. There should be one, certainly but let us be clear. The technology was misused and harm occured or has been implied. Apply the same response to the technology of guns. Have there been calls for the CEOs of gun producers to appear before congress? I think that murdering children is a bit more significant, yet the misuse of that technology has yeilded a deafening silence. The contrast is appropriate and obvious.
5
Whoops! I meant 100 a year for Facebook, Twitter, and Gmail, 10 more (110 a year total) for all three and Instagram.
I’m done. I deleted the app from my phone today.
4
Mark Zuckerburg may be a genius but he’s a genius without much of a moral rudder (not surprising from the creator of Hot or Not) whose primary motivators are greed and what appears to be an insatiable case of nerd revenge – an insecure man who just can’t stop wanting to be respected for being the smartest guy in the room. It is likely he just doesn’t get the moral angle because he is (no fault of his own) emotionally, socially stunted (ibid Hot or Not.) That Facebook allowed people to find connections in the absence of traditional ones is not on its face troubling – if Posting and Liking are the replacement for the bowling league and church dance, so be it. But Facebook has never really been about the connections, it’s about the data. And while Zuckerburg and his justifiers have been patting themselves on the back for saving humanity one connection at a time, they’ve really been looking to leverage their trove of data. Every time they are caught in the lie they start with a Casablancian, “Shocked, shocked I say…” and all the lawyerly, “We will NOT allow this…” knowing full well that they are untouchable and knowing that nothing short of shutting themselves down will change a thing. The unwitting masses who lay on bits of themselves in the platform in a never ending attempt to stay in touch have no place else to go; they’re addicted to the little bursts of acknowledgment and inclined to think it just can’t matter (if inclined to think about it at all.) Facebook knows this too.
9
Do any of you really think any of the online services (another supposed service is Google, for instance) have your welfare at heart?
If you've been online long enough, you'll remember Google's 'do no evil' motto - which ended with them tracking you forever, showing you ads as search results (instead of ads being separated over to the right side of the page) of what most closely matched the search string you typed in - and also them stealing actively copyrighted data from book authors whose works they photocopied illegally - even after the ensuing lawsuit, authors had to know their books were being copied and opt out, not in - but by then the damage was done.
Facebook took it a step further, gathering your friends' and families' data.
None of the info-gathering and ad-matching in results online companies have your welfare at heart. Only the $ they can make selling your data or luring you to the sites of the companies whose ads you are shown (they'll always show you the ads of those huge corps who can afford to pay the most), without your choosing to see those ads or in some cases, go to those sites.
Grow up, and wise up! 1984 is here! (read the book if you don't know what I mean by that remark)
If you want choices and some privacy, you have to do a bit of the work yourself. And likely it will cost you a small bit - but you will have a choice and know you're getting truth re what's going on in your world, or which company's clothes you prefer, or, or, or......
4
Zuckerberg, one of the biggest liberal hypocrites on the planet. He owns a home on Kauii where all beaches are public including the one in front of his home, yet he built a wall, yes built a wall, to keep people out. He then sued native Hawaiians over the issue and only dropped the lawsuit after it became public and gave him bad press. He claimed he "didn't know" Hawaiians considered it sacred land.
9
Friends have asked me for years why I'm not on Facebook. They have recently stopped asking.
11
Americans need more answers because it affected the outcome of our election. There’s much more to this story. There is more to the details of the statement on the undercover video stating they won the election for Trump. There’s more to who knew what at Facebook. Anyone at Facebook who was involved in compiling the data for Cambridge needs to be asked about any conversation they had. Hard to believe that no one at Facebook knew. This is huge. We need an investigation. Also, he needs to testify before Congress or given Trump team involvement possibly Mueller. He has to be looking st the possible connections. Also any Russians involved?
3
He only apologizes when he's caught, as in, stocks are plummeting and people are leaving in droves.
7
Facebook...STRIKE 3!
Mark. Mark. Mark. You have become a broken record.You have suggested the same measures twice before and did nothing and for a 3rd time caught in a large-scale scandal affecting your users privacy. YOU have made your billions and instead of ousting you fellow unknown millionaires perhaps it is time for you and Sandy to step aside and place others in place, who are can follow-up on accountability, because you don't care as long as your pockets are deepening.
So pardon me if I do not believe a word you say, even when you offer to appear before Congress to offer testimony but from send your legal team instead.
9
Subpoena Zuckerberg Mr Mueller! There are enough connections to Trumps people for Mueller to subpoena him and some Brits too.
Some of the indicted who were involved with the campaign and Russians must have had contact with Cambridge Analytica execs.
4
While I agree that Facebook is culpable for doing an irresponsible job of protecting privacy, I think the really important issue from this revelation is how low and despicable the tactics were that the Trump campaign was willing and eager to use to deceive voters and to cheat our country's electoral process.
3
How about bolstering integrity Mr. Z?
2
Zuckerberg, you've created a genie that you can't get back into the bottle. It is NOT okay to give away our info, even to "academics." You've done irreparable harm through your hubris. You should be prosecuted for violating privacy laws whatever they can throw at you and all your executives past and present who touched this at all. AND take away some of your billions, just to get your attention.
2
After much noise, Mark Zuckerberg broke his silence. Yet, with what he has to say now, does not sound serious. He is still considering to lift the ban on Cambridge Analytica.
Apart from the hacking of over 50 million users, god alone knows what else has been going on with user information in the possession of Facebook.
Mr. Zuckerberg's statements are not very convincing. The rules and regulations, and safety measures he is now talking about should have been in place, from day one of commencement of his business organization. A business model with no emphasis on internal controls, is what has led to all the problems we see today with Facebook.
2
Facebook could end the problems simply by doing this:
Charge $5 a month or $50 a year (two months for free when you prepay), $6 a month or $60 a year (two months for free when you prepay) for Facebook and Instagram.
Twitter could charge $4 a month or $40 a year (two months for free when you prepay) while Gmail could charge $1 a month or $10 a year (two months for free when you prepay.)
So $90 prepaid a year for Facebook, Twitter, and Gmail or $100 for those three and Instagram.
2
Facebook built a business model based on public/user trust. This is the second time they’ve played fast and loose with it in a year: election-based fake news and now private data misuse. I imagine that many thumbs, like mine, are hovering over the [Delete Account] link. They should be welcoming regulation with open arms. That’s the only path to the restored user trust they so critically need for their platforms to survive and thrive.
Zuckerberg ard Sandberg are talking heads, a lot of wholesome sounding jabber and a minimum of action. They have been aware of misuse for years, and they keep trying to wash their hands in the golden bowl of 'we're just a platform supporting free speech'. Neither one of them wants to spend the money and do the work required to clean the Facebook gutters.
3
I quit FB an hour ago. Mark does not need any more money. He should retire now.
7
I may be naive but I don’t think FB knows very much about me. My profile is minimal, I don’t use any apps, I don’t respond to news feed non friend items. Now why isn’t FB suing CA for 50 billion loss of market value?
1
"Serve you?" We are the crop that they reap. The farmer only loves the corn only as a commodity for profit.
2
And speaking of Commodities -- for quite some time now, those of us interested in such arcane considerations have been noting that Culture itself has been thoroughly transmogrified into a commodity. But now, thanks to upstart startups such as Facebook and various other platforms for the under-qualified, even fake culture has become a commodity.
3
I forgot to mention this, when I was describing the data I downloaded from my FB account just before I closed it: on my timeline.htm file is every single song I have listened to on Spotify! While it is true I don't remember that on December 13, 2016, at 9:03 AM I heard the third movement (presto agitato) of Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata played by Stephen Kovacevich, clearly Big Brother Mark Zuckerberg hasn't forgotten.
5
Mark the father of , living your life out loud AKA: Facebook. I asked Alexa how old Mark was . She ans, 33. And I LOL Out.
1
I think Mark Zuckerberg's accounting thus far is pretty good. I'm hoping that if he's asked to do so, he will share candidly with the Special Counsel. I believe that while there may have been individual lapses of judgement, and while the developers could not possibly foresee all excesses and misuses, the platform itself is essentially neutral and transparent to the intentions of those who use it. I've been a big user and try to be as helpful as I can spotting spammers, trolls, spoofers, etc., and Facebook will be a 'work-in-progress' for quite a while to come. I'm for freedom of expression and net neutrality, but when you're operating a sort of 'miracle-machine' like Facebook, which brings people closer together and builds community in many unprecedented ways, there will always be bumps in the road!
I can only imagine people felt the same way about currency as they do about Facebook today when it was discovered that some people would try and print counterfeit. The trails and travails we have to endure thanks to our human nature of messing with everything we come upon in bad ways.
2
Let's be clear. Facebook's users are not its customers. You are its inventory, its product. Its customers are its advertisers. Facebook users have elected to give away massive amounts of extremely valuable data with no compensation. And precious little recourse.
I'm one of the few people I know who has never had a Facebook account. This was a deliberate decision in the early days, which I stuck by each time I revisited it. At first, I just thought it would be a time sink I didn't need. Then the privacy issues surfaced, at LEAST a decade ago. It became clear that Zuckerberg's desire to have information "shared" didn't apply to HIS information. He is secretive in a way that he can't afford Facebook users to be. Think about that. This double standard should bother everyone. Facebook has been anemic AT BEST in addressing these issues.
During the recent presidential election season, it was clear to me, and should have been clear to ANYONE paying attention, that Facebook was the vehicle for massive disinformation. Zuckerberg publicly called that notion "crazy."
You can go through the ridiculously cumbersome process of deleting your accounts if you choose. I do realize that it's hard staying in touch with people in your life who only do so via Facebook. But in my view, for the sake of our future and because its executives have consistently failed to be honest or realistic, it needs to be shut down for some period during elections. It's fine for cat videos, not for democracy.
10
That was the best writing about FB that I have ever read! So right and well stated.
2
I was wary of Facebook from the start. I have a large, extended family. No way do I want to know what they are all doing on a daily basis, and no way I want them to know what I am doing.
But now, it turns out that subscribers give up information about themselves in the course of the use of that site, and Facebook collects it and keeps a file on each subscriber. And then makes it available to third parties.
Either they knew they were giving up this information for third parties to use as they pleased, or they didn't. If they knew, they are evil. If they didn't know, they are incompetent boobs.
History and the world are full of free things that can come back and bite the user. The Trojan Horse. The Roach Hotel. Add Facebook to that list.
6
Shame on every user of Facebook who does not guard their own privacy. Facebook is designed to profit from monetizing the data of users - that is the very cornerstone of their business model. How users can be so cavalier with their own information is what astounds me.
4
Oxymoron alert! No such thing as a Facebook user who can guard their privacy.
4
There is _no way_ the US government will drive facebook to financial ruin with gargantuan fines. Facebook has access to the personal information of 2bn people and is irreplaceable. Governments and their spy agencies have been doing what Cambridge Analytica does for a long time and with much larger budgets. They need facebook and their ilk for that.
2
Privacy? That's a laugh. Facebook exists only to collect and sell personal data. We who choose to communicate via Facebook are the product Zuckerberg sells. Anyone seriously think the man became so rich merely by inventing a new cyber bulletin board?
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
5
Facebook gave it's ENTIRE database to the Obama Campaign, who still have it (so if you deleted your account, Obama still has all the data).
It did so VOLUNTARILY.
4
The backstory appears to be rather fluid. It's a misuse of data, it's data harvesting, then it's improperly obtained data that historically has been handed out like candy by Facebook. Was it not too long ago we were reading stories of Facebook curators selectively suppressing certain news stories?
I guess one man's data mining is another man's privacy breach, depending on your political leanings.
A class action suit against Facebook would make sense about now!
3
I left FB after only about three months because it was a huge waste of time. This was nine or ten years ago. As crisis after crisis unfolds, I am amazed that FB has anyone left in its fold. Has everyone become a masochistic infant?
2
Since we are not in middle school nor in the principal's office, we don't need an apology from FB. We do need detailed assurance of how this cannot happen again. We really need to hear more about how the Mercer's have used FB data to create propaganda and influence elections. We need to know a LOT MORE about them and their strange Libertarian goals. Democracy is under attack, but the media is horrified, horrified! about Facebook. I hope the New York Times regains a sense of perspective soon. No one really needs Facebook, but we do need a free press, honest news and democratic elections. Please get back to work Times. We need you.
You signed up for this. You gave them all your data. Quit that platform. If it's free, you're the product. Don't be the product. And don't blame Facebook, this is their business model. They got to be a multi-billion company by selling your information which you freely supplied to them. They won't change as long as you keep doing that, Why should they.
31
I watched a bit of that disastrous interview with Zuckerberg. You must be joking. Does this guy thinks his customers are idiots? Apparently so, for the way he conveyed in insincere "sincere apology" for any harm done was pathetic. I've never had an urge let alone a "need" to get on the Face Book. I see no relevance in a devise which I have not needed in my life for over half a century. I continue to chuckle when family and friends extol the marvels of this site. I guess it's too far over my puddin' head to appreciate. My loss. Or is it?
DD
Manhattan
3
Will someone please develop an app that visits 100 random websites per second so that we can throw these companies one big fat red herring and destroy their business model?
2
How about all of those Alexas listening in? When is the country of natives going to throw those out?
5
I worked in Silicon Valley from 1980 to 2010, and saw the rise of what should be called antisocial media. I share with many of my contemporaries a distaste for the way the name "tech" is now applied to what is a supercharged gossip mill. Real tech created microelectronics, advanced computer languages and relational databases. Current "tech" simply takes the achievements of earlier times and applies them to selling bubblegum to bubbleheads. It's intellectually empty and morally corrupt. Turn your backs on it.
6
What was done here that was anymore wrong than what the Obama Campaign did in both 2008 and 2012? Where is the outrage there? There are interviews of Maxine Waters, for example, outright saying they had the largest data collecting campaign on Facebook, where they literally would use data of every individual to influence their behavior; they had networks where they would make sure your friends would be influenced to influence you (you trust your personal relationships more).
I neglect to see where the wrongdoing is here; it's not illegal, and companies, organizations, applications, and other campaigns do the same thing all the time.
This is just a tirade by the Progressive Left to oust Conservative voices from social media in an attempt to quash their growingly effective social media presence. Since Facebook and Twitter have updated their "algorithms," which they don't disclose, Conservative outlets have lost on average around 14% of their traffic; Progressive outlets have seen an increase.
If you're going to make a case here about Cambridge Analytica, at least be intellectually honest about your argument.
2
I joined FB after the death of newspapers. I use it to find out about arts events nearby and some social justice activities. I've deleted my account, and will have to check other online sources to keep abreast of activities, events and news that i care about. I'm sort happy that this scandal has come up. Not the interference in elections that is 5th column creepy. But now we all have to think deeply about how we want to use these incredibly powerful, and dangerous, tools the information age has brought to us. We expected the fox to protect the hen house. Let's learn from our mistakes and REGULATE.
1
I used to be an avid Facebook user up until 5 years ago. Then one day, it displayed a memory update from the year before on my page. It was about my ex-wife. That was the last straw. I don't need facebook to remind me about things in my life. This was a relatively minor problem, but it was enough to make me realize that I did not need facebook for anything.
The transgressions that Facebook has been involved in more recent times are far more grave than my experience. How that doesn't rub facebook users the wrong way is beyond me. The idea of social networks is good, but only if the operating companies were not for profit, displayed no commercials and had no commercial interest whatsoever. In their current incarnation, all social media services are highly corrupt and should be avoided at all costs.
4
The only way to effect change at FB is to #deletefacebook
3
No, just never bother to use it. I never have, and my life is just fine.
3
I really don't get it. The second you post something online, it ceases to be yours alone. Anyone who really wants to find your information is going to find it. Yes, I was very unhappy about Facebook having worked with the Trump campaign and been paid $6 million+ to use our personal data, but to me, the bigger issue is Cambridge Analytics - a hyper-black opposition, Mercer-funded, Bannon-run smear machine that exists solely to lie and spread disinformation and propaganda to unwitting people in order to win an election - and DID IT. Why isn't there national outrage over that? Why isn't it being targeted, shut down, and indicted for what it did? This is so much worse than Watergate.
3
Why is this a surprise that FB makes money off your data. When a company doesn't charge you to use their product. You are the product.
4
What, precisely, is the basis of people's trust in Facebook? Or, like so many other monkey-see, monkey-do aspects of our culture, is it just a grand-scale manifestation of herd mentality?
Put another way: Has the behavior of Mark Zuckerberg, beyond being monumentally egocentric, ever been genuinely reassuring?
4
Under the heading of you can’t make this stuff up:
1. Aleksandr Kogan is the author of the now infamous thesismydigitallife quiz used to harvest personal data on millions of Facebook profiles. He was born in the Moldavian Soviet Socialist Republic of the former USSR (Moldova today), in either 1982/83 or 1985/86 according to Wikipedia.
2. He has also been known by his married name as Aleksander Spectre (heads up 007 fans)
3. A Spectre is also known as a vulnerability that affects microprocessors that perform branching predictions which may leave observable side effects that can reveal private data to attackers
4. Cambridge Analytica was so enamored with the computer operations control center featured in the 007 film Golden Eye that they engaged the design team from the film to replicate this ops center for their HQ offices
5. Any questions? Do you hear someone laughing in the Kremlin??
3
Facebook and Uber have had the same catastrophic lie at their cores—that they are just “apps,” with no responsibility for how people choose to use them, or what happens to them when they do. Facebook led people to believe they were users, when they were the product. They marketed their data without conscience. Uber refuses to take responsibility for the safety and working conditions of their drivers, pleading that they are just an app, not a taxi company. Listen everyone, Facebook and Uber are not your friends. Stop using them until they are regulated for your benefit, not their own.
1
Technology Naivety:
Self identifying as a mediocre computer scientist, the misuse of computer technology is staggering to me. Notwithstanding a long list of stupid examples, machine computing has also benefited humanity. Like anything else, computing machines can be used wisely, or in the service of greed and the basest of human instincts Unfortunately, the loudest voices are hopelessly, post modernistic self serving. Social Media and the public World Wide Web and Internet have no, that is no, security or privacy. Hooking up public infrastructure critical systems to the former is the greatest foolishness.
Self driving cars, pundits announce they will reduce accidents without any proof, or thought to problems they will cause. This morning in very heavy rain in San Francisco, at a 4-way stop, another drivers quickly flashed their bright lights, signaling me to go ahead. AVs are programmed in one way communications, with one, visual, input interface to the external environment.
"...Mark Zuckerberg, the company’s chief executive, said if the site can’t protect information, “then we don’t deserve to serve you.” Mark, if you said this, fire your publicist! Simply lame!
1
Much earlier today I submitted a post which in which I contended that the chief purpose of Facebook is to generate revenue from advertising, and that, in essence, relying on a platform such as Facebook as a means of keeping in touch with friends is nothing short of pathetic. I made a much broader condemnation of what is currently called Commercial Speech, which of course means advertising. I argued that Commercial Speech is nothing less than a relentless and concerted attach against the integrity of language itself -- an attack against the integrity of language as a vehicle of coherent thought, and an attack against the integrity of language as a vehicle of public discourse.
I post this now, because I am wondering if my prior offering is going to appear.
1
These "friends" didn't care about you back in High School so why do you think they'd care about your cat pictures now?
Do you really think cause the class idiot who hasn't changed that much since high school has suddenly become a Political Scientist because he shared an article from Drudge that his co-worker (making $10 a hour beside him) sent him last night in an email about evil Hillary?
Zuckerberg could care less that you are the Manchurian Voters for a Manchurian Candidate working for Russian masters! I'll bet when your old sweetheart, or worse, the boy/girl who wouldn't give you the time of day back then "shares" his/her picture (from 15 years ago) you'll know leave your family and run to them because it's on Facebook...it has to be true or they wouldn't allow it to be posted!
4
The monetization of our personal data is Fbook's business model.
Will Kogan's "Philometrics"- a Silicon Valley data mining compay - be audited as well? Kogan was accused by other researchers at Cambrdge 4 years ago of "using" their research and for unethical purposes. It ended in mediation.
F-book's "due diligence" must have missed that little dustup.
The public should also be informed if Fbook is tracking and mining Americans' data that are not Fbook users. Otherwise what good is deleting Fbook?
1
I agree they were both "horrible"candidates. As an adult however, I am frequently faced with having to choose the lesser of bad choices. By not voting, you let others decide for you.
1
Critical Information Withheld by the NYT: The Obama campaign teams harvested and then exploited VAST amounts of Facebook user data in both the 2008 and 2012 elections. In fact, the female head of social media data ops for "Obama for America" (a registered PAC) even bragged about doing exactly that in a live public event that can now be viewed on YouTube. She and her team of data hackers were hailed as "geniuses" at that time. They even bragged how far ahead of the Republicans they were in exploiting social media for electoral success.
Why isn't the NYT providing this crucial context now in its reporting on FB and the Trump campaign? I guess it might offend their own "customer base." Hypocrisy at work in the national media? "Me oh my!"
Full disclosure: I did not vote for either Trump or Hillary in the 2016 election because I considered them both horrible candidates. I did, however, vote in all of the down-ticket races as an Independent.
2
Too late, I'm boycotting :(
2
The board of Cambridge Analytica and their parent company are all members of the conservative party, in the UK. They include its former chairman, mi5 members and the queens cousin mountbatten. Effectively the British establishment rigged the US, Brexit and UK GE17 elections, never mind Nigeria, ST Kitts etc this is way bigger than facebook. Corruption between the trump team, Bannon and the British establishment to rig democracy to get their desired result.
Warrant blocked in the UK by judge to search the company's office, pictures on social media of private vehicles and employees taking files away corruption trail going all the way to the prime ministers door
The whole premiss of all social media is that they make you think you can't live without them and that they can somehow make your lives better. Can you and can they? Pffft!
2
I agree, @Expat: "Got along without you before I met you, gonna get along without you now."
Sorry, I do not remember the name of the song/songwriter for attribution.
1
All I can think about is that stupid tight,gray t-shirt.It worries me. With all that money,has he nothing else to wear? I think wearing that juvenile t-shirt speaks volumes and says nothing reassuring .
2
Ellen is my type of lady. She wants men to dress like men.
I don't mean to sound harsh, but what can you say about a company whose business model is similar to a peep show. You build a playground and encourage the public to play there and, "trust me", you will be safe, and then you make money by allowing people to watch them from afar, whatever their interests, and use that information, freely disclosed by the unsuspecting patrons in all of their naivite. And its all legal because of unnegotiated fine print in a voluminous digital contract that most of us could not understand if we wanted to. Its always been a little creepy to me. Always felt like their logo should be a keyhole.
3
Most of so-called free media works on the same premise...
If you are getting it for “free,” you are NOT the customer, you are the product.
Read just about any site’s “privacy” agreements, and it becomes apparent that what is theirs is theirs AND what is yours is theirs.
1
Finally Zuckerberg has got past his youthful days where private was no big deal. As a father and wiser man he is finally seeing that privacy is something to cherish, not exploit.
A tax of $4 for every post would keep the use of FB to a bare minimum for any information leakage.
Zuckerberg reminds me of the aliens that come out of the spaceship on "close encounters of the third world", except he's the anti-christ. Hey Mark, please list all and exactly what data was taken on each FB sucker. Thank you.
Zuck is lying; I don't believe him for a minute. He is soooo happy to have those billions of $$ rolling in without him even having to take responsibility for ANYTHING, really. What a great con he's pulled off, and how many zillion people have fallen for it?
The success of FB, and people's willingness to believe people like Zuckerberg, are why I now understand how Trump got elected. You just need millions of sheeple with their brains in the "oh, of course I trust you!" position!
1
I conducted the following experiment:
- deleted my history and website data
- opened the NYT website and started reading this article
- checked website data
-> large number of ad trackers show up in my website data, including facebook
- installed duckduckgo privacy extension
- confirmed that 13 tracker networks were blocked on the new york times website including facebook
Your data shared by Facebook, Analytica? Your shares of Facebook stock have lost value?
You can thank the Trump campaign for that. Steve Bannon and Jared Kushner brought Cambridge Analytica into the Trump campaign.
1
Hold. mark. zuckerberg. personally. responsible.
Is LinkedIn as bad?
1
There was a breach maybe a year or so ago. I've never registered with Linkedin but I know someone whose email contacts was culled from that site and used to gather info. The Linkedin user found out after their contacts complained that they were getting spammed or something else. Outside source used the email contacts somehow.
1
Read the whole interview. By the time the interviewers get around to using the word "guilt" and inquiring if MZ feels any, you will have waded through some circumlocutory responses with baffling vapidity masking the dubious moral underpinnings of the traditional American corporate model of doing business. His answer is more of the same: "That's a good question...." he replies and delivers more of the same: Who knew...? Addressing that issue. Ad nauseum. Not exactly the product of some sort of soul-searching during his silence over this scandal to date. A survey of the ethical practices of that corporations-as-person AND no-engageable-persons-here-at-all (emoji goes here) model over the last 50 years is not inspiring, unless one celebrates the flourishing of collective society en masse. MZ's failure to face up to manifest any feelings on the topic is rather frightful. More like a case of good old "enlightened self-interest" at work. If it's all about systems, I'd best get with it, left behind in a more modest old world where personal responsibility was one measure of personage. But where is the person there? I don't know his bio, but he seems a good example of a brave new world in which the individual really doesn't matter, unless it happens to be oneself. Will these biz-wiz hi-tech "kids" mature into well-rounded human beings? That's a good question. But let's move on. Let's move on with leaders like Mark. Heck, he's always been a forward-looking person....
1
I wonder if this would be such a “big deal” if Hilary has won?
1
That signature tight gray t-shirt thing is just so stupid.
3
"... tight gray t-shirt ..."
Donald Trump always wears a suit. Would you prefer that?
Hipster
1
@Greg Nichols: the tight gray t-shirt does no favor to his pectoral region.
2
The Federal Government needs to break up this monopoly, and it's Facebook users who need to push our representatives to do so. The only reason we are just now hearing from Mark is this: Facebook folks were meeting to discuss the financial impact of how they respond. Mark stole the technology; Sheryl Sandberg helped him capitalize on that theft. Once advertising was introduced on a large scale (and to increase shareholder value after the IPO), Facebook saw its revenue exceed one thousand US dollars PER SECOND! The problem here is not the Trump campaign's use of data mining (Obama's campaign used Facebook in a similar - though less egregious - way), nor Russia's "invasion" into our electoral process (egregious as that is). The problem is that Facebook has no realistic alternative competition in the social platform world, and that's the way Facebook manipulates it. Mark and Sheryl are living the life while we click on and get pestered by useless ads that - every second - increase Facebook's net worth. If Facebook's raison d'etre was truly "a matter of trust" for its users, then there would be no need for any advertising. And despite what Mark says, there is no system wide fix that would work except the breakup of this most egregious monopoly.
The fact that the very core design of Facebook is to create virtual communities of like minded thinkers and feed them filtered content designed to manipulate them may turn out to be a fatal flaw. All the things that make Facebook a great vehicle for marketers also make it a great vehicle for enemy governments.
3
The year was 1991. Amazon, Google, and Facebook didn't exist yet. The Internet was still in the cradle and mostly consisted of email and newsgroups. The understanding at the Stanford computer science department was that nobody should casually use their real names on the Internet because information can be stored forever and privacy protection could never be guaranteed. Yes, there are people building protection technology, and there will always be just as many people working on breaking it. Privacy concerns pre-dated the Internet as we know it but were brushed aside in pursuit of the almighty dollar. Now that we have tried "move fast and break things", as Facebook likes to put it, let's bring back some of that old-fashioned computer science common sense.
7
I closed my FB account two days ago after first downloading (as recommended by the Guardian) the entirety of my data files from the site. Seeing the extent of this collection of information is mind boggling: every single photo, comment, message, and event is included for all the posts I have ever made; every response I have ever made to anyone else's post is included word for word; every login and logout is recorded, along with the accompanying IP address that reveals my location at the time; all my profile data plus my friends' phone numbers are included; every ad I ever viewed is recorded; the timeline of acquiring and rejecting friends is recorded. All of this kind of information for every FB user is stored by Zuckerberg and company in continuously expanding archives, accessible to whomever has sufficient power and authority. This is chilling. By closing my account I am to assume FB will destroy my files, but I don't really trust them to do it.
19
Apparently they don't delete your data files permanently even if you've closed your account. I am told you need to do another step(?) in a couple of weeks' time - they allegedly keep your files for several weeks - and then delete the app from all your devices.
2
All your stuff will remain in Bluffdale, UT indefinitely, regardless.
5
"... every ad I ever viewed is recorded; ..."
What info do they record about the ads? Could you post an example of a complete record for an ad?
The fact that some company got access to data pertaining to 50 million people on Facebook does not in any way mean that anyone's privacy was violated. And this is because no human being accessed any of that data in that an actual person discovered certain things about any actual person.
The data that was harvested was dealt with exclusively by a computer. And what a computer "knows" about a person is not an invasion of privacy.
As to the fact that their information was harvested by a private company, as opposed to Facebook, Google etc. 1. what difference does if make which computer is "privy" to private information about somebody 2. all companies that have data on people sell it to whoever is interested in it. 3 just about any site out one visits can install trackers that follow a person to every site they visit, which their computer then interprets based on its algorithm to "know" the most private things about that person.
And an algorithm can learn allot more about a person based on the sites they visit than from their likes on Facebook, which is what Cambridge Analytica did.
So the only way that people feel who feel their privacy is violated because of what a computer knows about them can use the internet is by not having a single email or social media account under their real name. Otherwise, not one private company will know anything they want to know about them, there will be hundreds upon hundreds.
I think you missed the point entirely. It is about what Facebook said they wouldn't do -- that they would not sell or give permission to gain access to the data they have collected to a third party without expressed consent of the content providers, e.g., the users -- and then turning around to do exactly that.
3
This is how he makes his money. This disingenuous business that he somehow doesn't know about it is too much. It goes back to 2011, not 2015.
November 2011
"The social networking service Facebook has agreed to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that it deceived consumers by telling them they could keep their information on Facebook private, and then repeatedly allowing it to be shared and made public. The proposed settlement requires Facebook to take several steps to make sure it lives up to its promises in the future, including giving consumers clear and prominent notice and obtaining consumers' express consent before their information is shared beyond the privacy settings they have established."
https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/cases-proceedings/092-3184/facebook-inc
3
"...there’s no way I thought that’s what I’d be doing if we talked in 2004 in my dorm room,” Mr. Zuckerberg said."
And this part of the problem, isn't it? Mr. Zuckerberg hasn't figured out that he's not in college anymore. FB isn't just another way to meet chicks, the world is bigger than the Harvard campus and the results can be catastrophic when the collected data gets in the wrong hands.
1
I reported an online threat and identified the account. FB did NOTHING. Much room for improvement in FB land. In the meantime, I"m checking out MeWe at a friend's recommendation and have discontinued posting to a page I manage.
3
His "vow" and $2.75 will get you a NYC subway ride.
7
I am sure that Mr. Zuckerberg NEVER put a gun to anybody's head to make them sign up to Facebook. When are we going to realize that there is NOTHING sure now or that ever was, EXCEPT: death and taxes. With today's technology in every field of knowledge available to mankind, anything is possible. I do not share any personal data or other information with friends or relatives because one does not know who will use it or abuse it. If one does not want your whole life exposed. stay away from that kind of technology. People now are complaining about their lack of protection for their data: it does not exist and never did. Get over and think before trying to be SOOOOOOOOOO POPULAR!!!
3
The simple solution is to provide Facebook users the right to "opt out", or forbid that any of their information is sold or given away.
This will not help with information already "out there" -- this information gets sold by its original buyer to other, then they sell it to others, ad infinitum, and it doesn't go away.
Zuckerberg's original business model was to provide a free internet communication service in exchange for the right to sell user's personal information to advertisers. Users could not "opt out" and forbid sale of their information. It's a very lucrative plan.
With the addition of all those algorithms, FB users are
categorized by their "likes" -- perfect packaging for marketers or spies.
I don't think election manipulation was considered when FB began, but now it must be, which means limited access to user info. and vetting marketers.
Zuckerberg "stepped around" describing any measures that would limit Facebook's income -- and there's the rub. Facebook still wants the bucks, and seems quite "laissez faire" about user information and global election tampering.
Too bad they haven't any competition.
1
Facebook isn't a public service. It's a billion-dollar publicly traded corporation. The product is users. There couldn't be an "opt-out."
4
Yeah, I said that in my comments.
I pointed that out in my comments.
He always says he's sorry, and then something else happens. We should never forget how he dismissed concerns about the fake Fb news in 2016 election--"a crazy idea." He has too much power.
2
Shut it down until they submit a detailed plan and that plan can be vetted and tested. Then an independent audit process should be enacted and any violation subject to a monetary penalty
2
We’ve known for a long time that Zuckerberg is missing the chips in his brain that would allow him to empathize with his users’ need for privacy. Loyalty and truth-telling as a businessman are not in his DNA. A snake is always a snake. Ironically, I am prompted many times a day (including just now by the Times) to log in to various vital online venues by going through the dark portal of Facebook.
2
The roots of this company were mean-spirited and damaging. 'Hot or Not'. Targeting young women at Harvard. Then he stole his friends' intellectual property. It's ridiculous, all of it.
2
Time to reel in social media. Stop using it. There is life without tweeting and all those pictures of babies and animals.
8
Did no one see "The Social Network," David Fincher's excellent film on the creation of this monster? Take a look this weekend (if you can bear to tear yourself away from your thousands of "friends" for two hours).
4
If Facebook had existed during the 1930's and 1940's, the Nazis and the Gestapo and the Stasi and NKVD would have completely prevailed.
Facebook is a primary tool for the world's thought police and "security" operatives.
As a treasure trove for commercial and political interests, Facebook users graze and gambol in the imaginary electronic fields they like. Apparently there are plenty of predators laying in the grass not far off.
4
“Facebook representatives confirmed that Cambridge Analytica representatives met with Facebook on Tuesday to discuss lifting the ban. Mr. Zuckerberg told The Times he did not rule out allowing Cambridge Analytica back...”
Seriously?!
3
Lawsuits have been filed against Facebook. For share holders who feel they’ve been duped and lost money. For people enraged that their data was stolen by a third party without their consent.
Get rid of your account if you care to. Also check on the web for these lawsuits, some of which intend to become class action lawsuits, in case you want to join,
Meanwhile, those of us who never joined no longer look nutty.
2
I find this all amusing.
Facebook clearly tells you they share your information and contacts.
MSN with Windows 10? Not so much. They do the SAME thing to target you with ads and try to insert their programs, can you say Bing tool bar, which tries to install EVERY time you to an update.
Free stuff ISN'T free.
2
What about all the other media "platforms" that encourage us suckers to "visit" them on Facebook? Some things I might otherwise be interested are closed to me because I choose not to have a Facebook account.
Yet other networks other organizations encourage Facebook's use. Instead of "visiting" on Facebook, why not "visit" their website?
2
George, that has happened to me, too. I have been dissuaded from participating in political activity because when I have volunteered to help, all I am told is "go on Facebook and share this post with your 'friends'." It feels rather sinister.
Correct. Sites that re-direct to FB, or allow FB to censor comments must re-think their positions.
God helps those who help themselves. Forget Zuckerberg, forget Facebook, We should help ourselves, protect our own data with a very happy God!
Perhaps the New York Times will reconsider partnering with Facebook to allow people to sign in to this website with Facebook credentials.
Is this how the trollbots find their way here?
In any case, I deleted my Facebook account today. Good riddance.
3
A day late and a dollar short.
5
Zuckerberg sold a major holding in Facebook to Digital Sky Technology, a Russian government owned business, several years ago. Any Facebook user since then has had their personal info on servers in Russia and freely available for use by the Russian government.
My desktop computer was invaded by a virus created in Russia (the Netsky virus) and destroyed. Since then, after a cost of several hundred dollars to restore the system, I deleted Facebook and have not been involved with it again.
Zuckerberg should be charged, convicted, and appropriately dealt with for his commission of crimes against the American people.
4
... unfortunately much of the general public who are not science, engineering, computer oriented, are not critical thinkers, and who don’t understand how the internet works ... who get a brain dopamine charge from self-disclosure, accumulating “friends”, narcissism, exhibitionism, putting all their “stuff” out there ... can be blind to how they are being used and to what risks they are exposing themselves ...
2
Too late. The cat is already out of the bag.
1
All publications, and web sites, that make a living by selling ads sell the personal information of readers, or users. The difference between Facebook and these other mediums is, first, that Facebook doesn't vet its advertisers, and, second, that the advertising each person sees on Facebook is personalized to that person's use of the site, and information shared in their newsfeed. Is this any worse than the conventional publication that promises advertisers they will reach a certain audience by sharing demographic information about its readers? I look forward to the day when ALL the advertising I am exposed to is personalized to my clicking, reading, and viewing history. The key is vetting the advertisers given access to the audience. Facebook simply has to set up a policy as any other reputable publisher would to not necessarily accept all advertisers, such as not publishing advertising sponsored by, and promoting, hate groups. I keep hearing the outrage that Facebook sold its users' "personal data." What is this "personal data?" What are you posting to Facebook that you're so afraid of people not your "friends" seeing. If it's that personal, why post it to a social media web site?
I've deleted Facebook. there are many similar platforms that offer the same product.
1
What makes you think they're any better? If it's free, you're the product. Don't be the product - on any platform.
1
The Board of Directors of Facebook will bring in another Brand CEO for the company within about 4 months. Zuck may remain Chairman but not CEO.
When a companies stock drops so precipitately, as it has for FB this week, that is what happens. The stock will bump if the new CEO is a great choice engendering trust*. It will take years to recover and build in data trust.
*Probably a woman. Or maybe a new secure platform from another company will emerge.
1
How many times has FACEBOOK said they would cleanup their act? I would not trust anything they say. I don’t think anyone at FACEBOOK, from the top down ,cares about anything but the money. They need to be investigated, and regulated. Follow the lead of the European Union on this. Let’s closely look at regulations for all social media.
3
So there's no American equivalent to the EU's legally upheld "right to be forgotten." Or am I missing something? A Facebook user can "delete" his or her account (which seems like a next-to-meaningless act), but that same user cannot order Facebook to 'forget' the information it has already garnered.
In other words you're gone but not forgotten.
"O Brave New World that hath such algorithms in't!"
6
Facebook had no problem responding to criticism from conservatives that conservative stories were being burned by editors at Facebook in spring of 2016. So Facebook closed its editing shop and voila influence peddling by conservatives flourished.
2
Congress needs Zuckerberg under oath, and also Facebook’s chief security officer, Alex Stamos, who had his security reports about Russian influence scrubbed, and was told by a high level FB executive not to look into where data sales end up.
The FB employees who worked on the Trump campaign's targeting programs, (see 60 Minutes) need to be questioned on what FB data they had access to during their employment with the Trump campaign.
3
I never joined Facebook, was never interested, but would like to understand why others do. Can someone explain this please? (The explanation has to be more than simply "keeping up with friends," or something similar. I keep up with friends just fine without Facebook.)
9
"I keep up with friends just fine without Facebook."
How do you do that?
1
I see them as often as possible, and catch up on the phone. Is this a serious question? I don't know - I work and have three kids and a husband, and stay pretty busy just doing what I have to do and trying to find time for things I like to do. I like to keep up with friends by actually seeing them, maybe take an occasional weekend walk, or have dinner or drinks together. I'm not being judgmental, I honestly have no understanding of the appeal of Facebook.
2
@GLY: It's called "conversation" - you can google it! - whereby people TALK to each other in person or on the phone.
BTW, how many FB "friends" do you think you have?? A few hundred of your nearest-and-dearest, or more than that?
2
Putting the onus on consumers to "be vigilant" is ludicrous. As another commenter posted, U.S. has extremely lax privacy laws -- in contrast with Europe, where privacy is understood to be a right.
I respect elderly members of Congress as much as the next voter, but really, some of them are clueless about technology! We need to elect lawmakers who understand the 21st century and have the courage to put some teeth into regulations and funding for enforcement that will level the playing field between tech giants and little-guy consumers.
4
So many top-management failures. Where do I begin? Let's start at "Mr. Zuckerberg said Facebook changed its policy" - policies don't mean squat when you fail to enforce them. Most companies' policy statements are full of platitudes and empty of substance; I know this from professional experience. Facebook is no different.
Mr. Zuckerberg is not communicating with relevant interested parties, displaying a bunker mentality, instead. Top management has a responsibility to itself, employees, contractors, vendors, and (not least of all) customers to communicate faithfully, effectively, and in a timely manner if the organization is to consider its products and processes "of the highest quality". Facebook is a spectacular failure in this respect, also.
Most alarming of all - and in this respect, Facebook is no different from many 21st century businesses - Facebook's primary objective is to make more money. One can be excused for thinking this is Facebook's sole objective. They are no different from Cambridge Analytica, the Trump Organization, and thousands of public and private organizations: How much more money can we make? Is cash inflow increasing? Are profits growing? Are stockholders happy? Every activity, every plan, and every discussion is focused primarily on profit.
For once in its existence, the Facebook organization needs to identify, focus on, and work diligently toward the long term. Its board of directors must take positive steps to regain the public trust.
2
Mark is playing symantics and I don't blame him.
This was not a breach but a violation of terms. A lawyer speak line if the ever was one. Collection of data to sell a product is not new. Where it might cross the line happens when the data attempts to entrape someone in an illegal act.
Look the truth is stretched all the time possibly a good read for people is Michael Shermer's piece in the March, 2018, Scientific American publication under 'Skeptic.
2
Never been on Facebook and only laugh at the millions who trust their lives to that massive junk pile. Love to see them crumble and erode into a hollow shell like Myspace.
6
Ha! Thought I was the only one never been on fb or other social media of any kind! Email , txt and phone calls still serve my purpose !
“Social media free lives matter !”
3
Zuckerberg, brush up on how to spell class action lawsuit, and you should be prohibited from seeing financial interest in Facebook on suspicion of insider trading.
4
Self-regulation doesn’t work. Ask the Catholic Church, NYPD, Trump Organization, etc.
Time for hard regulation of how data is moved from the many to the few. We need data of the few given to the many.
4
The Left is hoisted with its own petard.
If not for the Left’s visceral hatred of Trump, the Facebook and Google exploitive, fraudulent business model would have remained unnoticed by their users and remained ignored by their stockholders.
As Bart Simpson would say, “The ironing is delicious.” ("Grift of the Magi")
P.S. I don't seem to recall reading any complaints from The Times or its stenographers when Eric Schmidt—big-time Democrat CEO of Google and King-of-Data-Mining-of-our-Personal-Info-that-made-him-a-multi-billionaire—practically lived in the West Wing, advising Obama how to use every high-tech-to-lowlife technique in the Google arsenal to manipulate and defraud We The People.
Cambridge Analytica didn’t do anything illegal and Facebook was not hacked. It was used. This is just the digital equivalent of grassroots politics.
What Cambridge Analytica did do wrong was to be owned by a couple of conservatives.
3
While a legitimate privacy issue, there is hardly anything else to see here. Why not focus on true data mining that affects our daily lives, like WebMD, or the three major credit bureaus? They all collect highly private data on us, much of it without our permission, on a massive scale, and then SELL IT BACK TO US.
During the 2012 Presidential campaign Facebook reps walked into the Obama campaign field office and said " We will give you guys more access to our subscriber's data than we do other people because we're on your side." This was the most chilling thing I have heard in regards to the Facebook debacle. What good are security measures when Zuck can just invite special guests into the henhouse and let them have at it? What happens if someone like the Kochs wind up owning Facebook and do the same thing only against the Democrats? This goes way deeper than politics and cannot be handled by just reprogramming some security measures.
4
Oh, so he will not be using YOUR information to increase his wealth?
1
Facebook closes, there will be another platform propping up.
Deal with the immediate.
1
Zuckerberg versus Trump.
Have at it.
Putin, Xi wait in the wings.
2
What I hate most about FB is the the pathetic, sleazy world of Facebook "Likes":
http://mankabros.com/blogs/onmedea/2013/03/05/the-pathetic-sleazy-world-...
2
Zuckerberg, Facing Facebook’s Worst Crisis Yet, Pledges Better Privacy Only If YOU Do Not Give Him Any Information About Yourself
1
Someone please explain to me how Facebook which makes it's profits by aggregating and selling targeted data obtained by mining its users every post, like and share and selling the culled information is going to guard anyone's privacy? The very concept of privacy is antithetical to the Facebook business model.
8
There's no reason to believe the Facebook will safeguard your information. That's how they make their money trading in your information. They may rewrite the terms and conditions, but they'll still be able to use your information and you'll agree to it to use the platform.
9
What a great guy MZ is - it's not that Fb can not protect from uses such as Cambridge Analytical, and that's only one "small" example; I don't believe anyone can.
I frankly cannot understand this level of outrage toward a platform I voluntarily use and gave only the most basic information to. Meanwhile, Equifax can dump my most personal financial information online and get only a share of this public backlash? And nothing but a slap on the wrist from the government? All this with credit bureaus being institutions I did not voluntarily give my infinitely more private information to and have no way of opting out of. I think we all need to better focus our energy and outrage on where our privacy protection matters most.
50
Maybe not for you, but for many the information on "Facebook" is a pervasive sampling of their "information".
2
Credit reporting agencies are outsourced to India, representatives who barely understand English are managing U.S. citizens' credit which is crucial to their survival. An outrage.
Facebook is equally deleterious for this country, breaching privacy and putting many teens and women at risk for their lives by offline and online stalkers. As well as ongoing privacy breaches of the general public.
The U.S. does NOT protect the privacy of its citizens--at all. I researched myself online and found that a trust left to me by my parents is detailed online as a "non-profit." Imagine that.
Violence, firearms, and lack of healthcare and lack of privacy: What a combination in a first-world country that should--and can--treat their citizens so much better!
1
And when did they affect the election?
2
Zuckerberg pledges "better privacy?" Really? Better? Why not best? Isn't his statement the same as closing the barn door after the horse is already out? Thanks, Zuckerberg for your concern.
4
'Zuckerberg pledges "better privacy?"'
Zuckerberg never uses the phrase "better privacy". Try to find an actual Z quote and complain about that instead.
1
Bannon and Cambridge used that database to test the effectiveness of certain phrases such as "Lock Her Up" and "Drain The Swamp" by showing specific people...or small groups of people those messages...and tracking response (liking forwarding etc)...and then applied what they learned to help the messages achieve "viral progression".
I believe that all of this is "legal".
This is just the tools of the commercial advertiser being applied upon the tasks of a political campaign to "win hearts and minds".
But...perhaps...it should be illegal.
Sure..sure....free speech and all...I get it.
But it is NOT legal to shout FIRE in a crowded theater.
Maybe it should also be illegal to shout ANYTHING during an election.
We are sheep. We are steerable. Crowds are strange and spastic organisms.
There is no accounting for taste...and advertisers are VERY convincing.
For proof of this look at the popularity of the Kardashians...and of new Levi's with holes in them...and of fidget spinners.
6
"We are sheep. We are steerable."
Do you mean to include yourself among the "sheep" and the "steerable"?
Seems to me that Facebook is always apologizing for things after the fact. . .after they've been caught. This isn't as simple as a hacker stealing information. They willingly gave the data over to CA. I'd love to see the contract they had with them to see if there were any controls or contingencies about the use of the data. My guess is there were not.
We're getting into an area where free speech and privacy rights are all mixed together. This will be a difficult area to straighten out, but impossible if profit-driven entities are involved.
I cancelled my Facebook account the day they went public. Enough said.
8
I propose "A Day Without Facebook" on May 18. The day they went public in 2012. Send a message - we the people are what creates value for Facebook.
On one hand, it is objectively understandable that folks want their privacy vigorously protected even when they use social media. On the other hand, you should also understand that having a social media presence, even with audience (and other) restrictions in place, is hardly the best way to secure your privacy. So, I don't get the outrage about social media being mined by third parties to benefit other third parties. I'd be far more shocked if it wasn't happening. Thus, if your privacy is genuinely important to you, don't have a social media presence.
3
Deleted my account today.
Social media needs to be put on notice, and more controls need to be imposed.
8
Congratulations! Now be sure to stay off Facebook for at least 14 days, because if you try to go back on it before then, your account will automatically be reactivated.
1
Over the years, despite my being a programmer, people looked at me like I was crazy when I told them that Facebook (and Twitter) are TREMENDOUS violations of privacy. But "... it's how I keep track of my family and my friends and everyone's on it and it lets me have the whole world. ..." See? Just wait 'til the power goes off and you cannot charge your battery in your cellphone or your computer, etc. The sky IS falling and you don't even know it or want to see it. Zuckerberg's a liar like they all are. Are you really impressed with his billions? He's laughing at you all the way to the bank...
7
Outside of being the world's biggest time sink, with mostly trivial and silly stuff, Facebook invades your privacy? Shocking!
People hang all their laundry out for the world to see and then become so incensed that the world actually looks at it and steals some of it.
I don't get it.
6
If you want to bleed your heart and then have it sold to a stranger, use tell facebook.
3
Nothing would make me happier than to see Facebook disappear.
10
Whenever we use a social media platform, surf the web, or buy stuff online— we get a ton load of ads tailored to us because of the info we have willingly given each site we visit.
And I am fine with that. If i can find cheaper air fare, or hotel, or running shoes, or vintage clothes from pop up ads, honestly I am good with that.
That’s how the internet works. I signed up for that knowingly when i bought a smart phone and computer with internet service.
I did not sign up for all this other crazy nonsense. What is different with the Zuckerberg mess is that it has moved way beyond pushing ads at me on products i buy and use.
I DON’T want my data sold to nefarious shadowy creeps that swing elections world-wide AND THAT UNDERMINE DEMOCRACY. I did not sign up to get bombarded with Nazi propaganda. I did not sign up for fake news. I did not want my data to support the election of Donald Trump.
Social media platforms need European-style regulation now.
5
"I did not sign up to get bombarded with Nazi propaganda. I did not sign up for fake news."
You didn't clearly state whether or not you personally have ever been "bombarded with Nazi propaganda" or have seen "fake news".
I guess its official that Mark Zuckerberg is running for office because he sounds like a politician on a campaign trail making promises he has no intention of keeping.
6
The writing is on the "wall", Facebook's "timeline" is up, "like" it, or not, Mark is not your "friend", he does not know the meaning of the word.
7
NYT needs to do some digging. They have said the same thing multiple times, same "we must do better", same never directly apologizing. It is all just careful management of the press with PR, and hope we forget until it inevitably happens the next time. My hope is NYT starts including a timeline of every time they promised to do better with people's data.
3
Under WHIB [where have I been]: FB corporate is at 1 Hacker Way. Let me say, what a knuckleheaded choice for a social media corporate address.
Facebook has also been quite instrumental in propagating fake news that eventually swayed electoral results in the countries like the Philippines. Facebook has allowed itself to be weaponized not just by Trump and Putin, but way before the U.S. elections, by hoodlums like Duterte.
Responsible users have reported incidents of trolling and fake news only to be ignored.
4
Also Brexit!
2
Mark Z. has suddenly emerged to say I'm Sorry! The strong tone of his apology is being driven by the number of people leaving the platform, not because they are ready to acknowledge problems or realize suddenly that an apology is due.
3
Nobody's personal data is private and safe, on any computer operating system (Mac, Windows, Linux) in any country, at any time, from any intruder, on any laptop, cell-phone, tablet or standalone computer. Everyone's extensive personal data has been mined by multiple companies, sold on the black market, copied by nefarious business entities, stored by the NSA, CIA, MI6 and other international "intelligence agencies" (in Utah in the United States), stolen by anonymous people inside companies that are supposed to be safe, extorted from people who are supposed to keep it safe, stolen by unhappy employees who work for companies that keep the data, stolen by technicians who service computers on whose hard drives personal data is saved.
Edward Snowden revealed the U.S. Government is doing this which is why he now lives in Russia. For every Facebook situation there are 7 more we never hear about because the crimes have not been discovered. For every mouse you see in your in your kitchen, there are 7 more you don't see..
How quickly people forget all this. All those little "accept" boxes you click on your iPhone or Android device followed by pages of fine print is the consent you give business entities to pilfer your life.
3
Corrected:
RESPONDEAT SUPERIOR: "The boss shall answer."
One of the cornerstones of our legal tradition since Roman times is accountability of an owner/boss/master for actions under his authority & from which he benefits. RS "holds an employer or principal legally responsible for the wrongful acts of an employee or agent, if such acts occur w/in the scope of the employment or agency."
It's great that we are hearing from Facebook's "superior" (boss), but hopefully this "accountability" will manifest *legally,* not merely "conversationally" ("oopsies!") or making prospective promises.
Facebook -*& Mr. Zuckerberg personally*- should *legally* answer for whether FB directly or indirectly facilitated a) foreign attack on our political process, b) campaigns of disinformation, c) trafficking in customers' private information without their meaningful consent (incl. for possibly adverse political uses). And, of course all 3 combined.
Central to the legal matter would be foreseeability, as well as the element -& esp. *magnitude*- of financial gain (incl./esp. Mr. Zuckerberg personally). If a humanitarian, no-profit operation unwittingly missteps while undertaking charitable works, one standard should apply, while a pure business enterprise reaping billions for owners should be scrutinized differently.
Facebook's (in such obvious "human capital" ways) business scheme more closely resembles the porn, human trafficking, & black market organ industries than Doctors Without Borders...
1
"Central to the legal matter would be foreseeability, as well as the element -& esp. *magnitude*- of financial gain involved."
"Central to the legal matter would be" a statute or a contract, neither of which you mention.
I probably should've said "not a lawyer." However, if I'd take a non-lawyer stab at it, I'd say by inviting people to join, presenting Facebook as a device for "sharing & connecting" w/ friends & family just for the trouble of signing up & adding to FB's pool of members/% of world population (FB makes its massive popularity/global reach, copiously advertising its recruitment success, one of its major selling points), but otherwise free of charge, Facebook does enter into a contract w/ users: offer, acceptance, & consideration are satisfied. Once that's established, perhaps a case could be made that abusing customer data for FB's commercial benefit violates an implied term not to commercially exploit customer data at least not unfairly or abusively. I do know there is an implied term of good faith/fair dealing; this would prohibit any recklessness w/ data. As a non-lawyer I don't know how all these grievances about misuse of data would play into those contract doctrines, but as long as there's some ethical breach or recklessness, good faith/fair dealing ought to cover it, I'd surmise.
As to statutes, I presume (quite possibly wrongly) that participation in disinformation & election tampering schemes, for $ millions, violating customer privacy in the process, with foreign, hostile entities, would go afoul of some statute.
I believe the enormity of FB profit, that it had staggeringly abundant resources, shows recklessness to not devote substantial resources to safety/security.
1
Security? This isn't about security, it's about a flagrant disregard for the personal data of millions of people. Zuckerberg thinks we're all a bunch of useless idiots, but he sure does like to reap the fiscal benefits that come with possessing and controlling our idiotic data. I mean, bully for them if they start protecting the portion of our digital identities we've stored on their platform, but really, that's not what the freakout is over. The freakout is over the fact that this isn't about a security breach; nobody hacked into Facebook and stole this data. Facebook happily gave it away. Now, if reporting is to be believed, it is residing on a bunch of unencrypted drives and who knows, maybe "backups" have been made...and shared...what a mess.
4
Without leaking data, Facebook is simply a factory that manufactures confirmation bias.
I don’t think that the folks at FB sought to create havoc when they showed anti-Clinton ads to Trump leaners or vice versa. They just knew that people will hang around longer and look at more ads when presented with stuff that confirms or reinforces beliefs. A confirmation bias engine like FB is by itself a terribly destructive force in a society. If we add to that the recent revelations of the illegal acquisition and gaming of FB data by the likes of Cambridge Analytica both on behalf of the Trump campaign and pro-BREXIT advocates, it becomes an inescapable conclusion that FB and its business model profits from the stratification of society and that they facilitate global-scale mischief.
I bailed on Facebook years ago. An insanely stupid and intrusive vehicle to harvest user data. Did anyone really think it was about sharing vacation photos? Even more enraging, Zuckerberg is playing dumb and is "shocked" that user data was misused.
6
Facebook has become a Cess pool of fear mongers and morons. Try to quit, it is near impossible. Alvin Stoffler's book 3rd Wave, said Information age is third wave and he who has most information wins. FB has collected more personal information than any one other than God. I hat FB even more now. Protect your own data DO NOT GIVE IT TO FACEBOOK!!!!!!!!!
3
Hilariously, when you want to comment on this NY Times article, you are given the opportunity to log on using Facebook! Perhaps I should just send my comment directly to Steve Bannon.
3
I had a short run on Fakebook it reminded me of High School, I mean come on there is a friend count you don’t get more adolescent than that.
We are talking about a man who created a platform originally for College students to “socialize”, a man who seems to have grown up sheltered who probably felt this was a cute way for people to “socialize”. I don’t believe this is a person who thought about the dangers or responsibilities or he didn’t care.
It is unacceptable to me that we are so blasé about the dangers of social media or that we exploit our amendments and use them as an excuse to be glutinous, irresponsible and dangerous.
Why is fake socializing so important? It has changed us as a society.
3
What I don't understand is why anyone would think that your data--and privacy--is perfectly safe when you add it to a website. Your personal information is worth a lot of cash, and everyone wants in on it. Facebook is the tip of the iceberg.
Now ask yourself, how good an idea do you think it is to use those DNA analysis and ancestry websites to literally put every detail of what makes you who you are online?
2
FB has succeeded precisely because it has been giving the American people what they have wanted: News articles, personal connections, etc., based on their own likes, dislikes, tastes, political philosophies, etc. Don't people understand that these things are based on info that they've provided voluntarily? Don't they understand that FB exists to make a profit? (If it didn't, we would treat it suspiciously, as being un-American!)
If FB stopped providing this service, someone else would step in and replace it.
Certainly, European-type privacy protections should be explored. Zuckerberg admits that. Privacy laws that limit FB and its potential competitors/ replacements would be a good thing.
Typically, the American people are blaming someone other than themselves for their decisions. And all those who are blaming Zuckerberg for not anticipating the Cambridge incident: How many of them were astute enough to see it coming?
1
Never joined. I started to once after my company made a big deal about 'social prominence' and 'social media prescience', but when I saw the privacy settings and all the complexity and loopholes surrounding it I stopped building my profile and quit. As been already stated in this forum: if you're not paying for it you are the product.
However, people can get stuck in a bad place if they are not in social media. In my area employers and clients begin questioning one's competence and skills if one is not on social media. Do we have to sell our souls and privacy just to earn a living? We have really painted ourselves into a corner.
4
Potential employees who are not on Gmail are also viewed with suspicion. If you don't use an Apple laptop you are viewed as not "with it."
I don't trust Google or FB, and want nothing to do with them.
2
Facebook can't protect our data. And when breaches happen, it doesn't tell us. As Zuckerberg says, "then we don't deserve to serve you."
I changed my profile picture to a notice that my account will remain in active until May 2018, Zuck has that long to convince me to stay otherwise I will delete permanently.
You really should delete your account today. I deleted mine years ago. Facebook is a cancer on the American people.
7
Two things I think everyone online should always remember and live by: one, if you don't want everyone to know something about you, don't tell anyone online, and two, always remember that everything - EVERYTHING - you do online, even just a simple click of 'Like', 'Report', 'Yes' or 'No' is telling someone something. If you're not sure what you're telling or who you're telling it to, then you probably shouldn't click.
7
De-activated my account with FB last night, felt good to have more than one excuse to do this.
7
Help! How did you do that? I triedand was sent in circles
ending in frustration. Huff Post gave up, said, "Just don't
use FB." I want out.
2
he addressed the problem: let us see the results. The damage has been done,: move on, move forward, I hear to much I am sorry and too little, hear is what shall be done. He skipped the sorry, and named the problem to be solved.
1
I'd like to know if all these people who are saying why are you complaining about FB's failure to protect your data since its your own fault since you used FB also refrain from using google, gmail, yahoo, etc.?
If you commented and you use any other "free" online service, then you are turning over data as well and the same problems exist with google and gmail. Which means that we either abandon the internet or we make sure services that hoover up our data protect it or that we can opt out or both.
1
In addition to citizens leaving Facebook, we have to prevail upon corporations to do so.
PBS, for example, has a Book Club together with the NYTimes.
But the kicker?
It’s on Facebook! (Which I’m not on.) Why is this the only way to participate? Couldn’t the Tiimes and PBS together host a Book Club site? Or each one provide a “book club” place on their own site?
Why do so many people and corporate entities aid and abet Facebook? For free advertising? Is there a monetary kickback? For the free net space?
Please, Times, consider that you have - perhaps unwittingly - become part of the problem!
I refuse to participate in anything that mandates joining Facebook in order to do so!
19
At least Zuck can be proud, to be a big part why Trump was elected.
2
Never have I been so proud to be a Luddite.
7
"If you had asked me, when I got started with Facebook, if one of the central things I’d need to work on now is preventing governments from interfering in each other’s elections, there’s no way I thought that’s what I’d be doing if we talked in 2004 in my dorm room...”. How about from your $million+ office complex?
1
Facebook could do community service:
A) protect America from Russian Intelligence officers, who flipped the last 2016 election in favor of the Russian candidate.
Help protect future American elections from hostile foreign military agencies (you can bet the farm that Russia is asking North Korea to attack the USA, in order to create more confusion.)
I am shocked, shocked I tell you! to learn that people have used my information on Facebook to their own ends! I had believed that posting pictures and comments and itineraries and travel photos and my likes and dislikes and political leanings on an open public forum was utterly secure! How dare they mine my data for their nefarious schemes!
So I opened my life up to the internet with gleeful abandon and said hey, stranger, come on in and look at my life, warts and all, but omg! don't do anything with it that I might disapprove of! "Like" me and feed my need for attention, that part I love, but don't use my naiveté against me! Yeah. Right.
Except in scale, this "invasion" of our privacy is as old as time. A hundred years ago we had party lines and when you made a phone call you knew all your neighbors could listen in on your conversations so, if you had a functioning brain, you were careful what you said on the phone. In the 60's we had telephone operators who could, and did, listen to calls - celebrities were favorite targets - and chortle amongst themselves as the unsuspected celebs aired their dirty laundry to a friend.
If you really thought your postings on Facebook were sacrosanct and private you have the mental acuity of a turnip. Mr. Zuckerberg created a famously open
platform for people to exploit and they exploited it. Now they are crying foul. Seems to me they should be looking at the mirror. That's the real fool here.
7
Dear Mark Zuckerberg, here is an easy solution to your self created crisis. Let Facebook be a charge on the monthly cable bill. Maybe $1.00 or a bit less per month, you decide. And then let users have an ad free and private network. You and your sycophant, Sheryl Sandberg won't make as much money, but you have both amassed more than any one person can spend in a lifetime.
3
Facebook seems to be a amoral company and we the "consumers" lapped it up because it was free and fun -- until it became tedious and a total invasion of privacy. Time to sign off this failed social experiment; I can easily live without funny cat videos. #DeleteFacebook
4
There is no free lunch. One always ends up paying a huge price. In the case of "acebookers", who were merrily rolling in with instant invites, friendships and "likes" made them an easy target for wily Putin and his cabal enabling them to manipulate our elections and implant a craziest of the crazy in the White House. Shame on Zuckerberg. I wish he had remained at Harvard and finished his education.
3
Those merrily surfing the Facebook vanity wave, are equally to be blamed. How on earth did they think it was free, that their personal and private information was safe? Gullible.
1
What bothers me the most is that for months back in late 2016 and in 2017 journalists investigating the Russian attack (let's call it what it is) kept asking Facebook for answers to the obvious, which was all the propaganda and lies about Mrs. Clinton that Facebook members saw, either on their own feeds or on their friends feeds! And Facebook denied, denied, and denied!
Finally, Facebook could not LIE anymore when it was made public that they accepted payment for ads and political propaganda in....rubles!!!!
IF we are honest, the 2016 presidential election should be nullified, for the very specific reason that Russian DID meddle, more than meddled! Russia worked hard to promote its puppet.....Donald J. Trump! Fact! And this alone should nullify the 2016 election!
Shame on Facebook!
4
I went to the Facebook settings page and clicked on the apps setting. You must click on each application to set the privacy setting you prefer. I chose “just me” for those I wish to retain and deleted apps I don’t use. It’s time-consuming but worth it.
2
Wondering if Facebook will be a blip in the radar when considered 100 years from now...Nobody knew how fast it could rise, I wonder how fast it can fall.
4
Mark got to sell a bunch of ads pre-election. And now he got his tax cut. That's all he cares about.
4
This was the straw. I have been trying to quit FB like a bad habit for a while. Each time I came close, I would convince myself that I would miss too much. Too much what? Cat videos, ads for things I had no interest in, nasty political arguments. I will miss the connections made with family and friends, but there are other ways to connect. So now I am ready to quit. It will be good to get rid of the this timewaster. My quitting won't make one bit of difference to the people who have made millions from FB (Zuckerberg can kiss it) but it makes a huge difference to me.
11
Every vote counts! And you leaving Facebook COUNTS!
4
"... nasty political arguments."
"I will miss the connections made with family and friends, ..."
Were you participating in those arguments, and, if so, with whom were you arguing? Your "family and friends"?
I don't believe a word of it. This young pup is a billionaire and now is able to mind control millions of people. He has already done huge damage through the election of Trump. But it is always worth the money.
5
FB makes money when advertisers target an audience according to individual preferences. That is the appeal.
The story here is that Steve Bannon and Cambridge Analytica and Breitbart and Trump's campaign (including the RNC) coordinated their messages to sway voters based on those stated preferences. It wasn't illegal, perhaps, but it was manipulative and opaque.
FB now can promise changes, which it won't implement for two years if at all, but that would lack a certain appeal for their paying customers. Too many people have made too much money off FB to want that.
But it is the job of Congress to protect us from nefarious intrusions into our personal lives.
4
The Big Message here?
Americans MUST demand PRIVACY protection!
Europe has far greater understanding and legislation to protect privacy. We can look to the EU for what laws are needed.
In the US, unfortunately, it’s money, property and corporations that the law protects and citizens pay the price.
If we cannot protect the vote or our privacy, then business will increase its ownership of our government and our personal data.
I never joined Facebook. But I am hugely concerned that surveillance of citizens by corporate entities is eroding our democracy.
Over and over I’ve seen Facebook’s lack of privacy exposed again and again. There are many ways to stay in touch with people which offer more privacy.
Rid yourself of your addictions to corporate surveillance!
12
That practiced and phony look of contrition on Mark's face(book) would be a bit more believable if he also announced that he was donating the entire amount of money that FB made off of Cambridge Analytica (and show how much it was with documentation)- and give it to an open internet support group.
6
Well, if he donated that part of FB profits, he'd be personally left with only x gazillion dollars, FB corp. with xn gazillion. Big sacrifice!
I'm thinking more like long jail sentences for anyone who profited directly or indirectly from any misfeasance undermining our political process or abusing private data for profit (especially the 2 combined, which amounts to literally "selling out" our precious, fragile democracy), then excusing any culpable parties from prison strictly conditionally on forfeiting literally ALL profit/personal income from Facebook exceeding the net personal wealth of Facebook's median user.
If Mr. Zuckerberg is going to accept responsibility and accountability, for that matter meaningfully live up to a notion of "connecting and sharing" in this responsibility/accountability context, only such a financial measure would suffice: His money where his mouth is.
Anything short of that is fatuous consumeristic Facebook blather.
1
Hollow words from a billionaire who built his fortune up from nothing. All he had to do is get advertising money and data-collection money. He should monetarily compensate anyone whose data was mined and used.
That said - I remain frankly bewildered why anyone thinks that we can use something for "free" and there's no cost. As for my facebook profile's having been misused by advertisers, etc.... I literally can't go on the internet without ads popping up. And curiously, by some sheer cosmic coincidence, these ads are all for something I looked at, something for which I shopped. This is how the internet works. As long as my passwords and security have not been compromised and no one has access to my financial accounts or social security number, that's it. This hysteria about quitting facebook is just that.
And now you know how the internet works.
1
"... these ads are all for something I looked at, something for which I shopped."
Don't you have your web browser configured to reject third-party cookies and to delete all cookies when quitting?
The only pledge I see here is to "say whatever is necessary in order to get those $19 / 10% that we've lost on our stock price in the last week". That 10% drop is worth about $50B in market cap and seems to be the biggest impetus for this apology.
3
Zuckerberg's commentary is both insulting and naive. This was not a "breach of trust," which implies some sharing of the blame. This was a failure by FB of basic business conduct and competence. FB was providing sensitive information for a fee and did NOTHING to assure that the data were ring-fenced and not deployed beyond the intended use. Greed, inexperience, arrogance, and rookie business sense made this a perfect storm.
9
Why blame only Facebook? What do you think Google or Microsoft does with our data? I am just waiting for a all out war against IT behemoths that offer freebies like email/social networking etc. All they want is free customer data.
5
Yes we need to stop sharing data for services and discounts.
And don't forget the Credit Rating companies like Experian and Equifax. Ginormous data breaches and the executives just don't care. Why? because like Facebook and Google etc... we are not customers, we are products to be bought and sold for our data. Time to adopt European privacy laws where privacy is actually a right!
1
Somewhere, the Winklevoss twins are raising a toast.
5
Everyone, hear me: Quitting Facebook will be the BEST thing you’ve ever done. Years ago, I was fascinated with people acting more depressed than usual checking in with all the ghosts of their past. Not letting bygones be bygones, but instead keeping in touch with every element and person of life that was designed to naturally drift away. Comparison is the thief of joy and Facebook is one large comparison chart. We are not designed to examine other peoples lives online, daily. We are meant to let life flow and the good and bad to come and go. Quitting Facebook was like sawing off an arm. I have never been happier to have the people in my life that are IN my life and the people who are out of my life... well, to have no idea what they’re up to. It’s FABULOUS.
9
Facebook needs to let its users decide how they want to use the site. Stop putting up old posts first; stop allowing fake news, stop giving away our information without asking if it's okay, and stop thinking FB knows more than we do about what we want. FB doesn't need to make a gajillion dollars to be successful and to be a force for good, or at least not-harmful.
24
Ahh, So many puzzling stares even from employers "not on facebook?" Translated into creepy at some point in America."
Ohh does that mean I'm cool again?
7
Zuckerberg, " We have a responsibility to protect your data, safeguard your data and we failed. " And how! Our country is in shambles and we Facebook users are completely compromised. I don't believe Zuckerberg's Facebook intended this to happen. But it sure turned a blind eye, wittingly or unwittingly when the data breach was happening. Facebook going into the future might be more vigilant and take steps to repair the breach. But ultimately only Facebook users can do something. Stop using Facebook! Only we can safeguard our data. That is our responsibility - to protect ourselves, with or without Zuckerberg.
3
Interesting that FB should claim they will protect their users privacy when their business plan is to do the exact opposite. They harvest it, they manipulate it, they break it down into commercial size packets for individual retail sale to whomever, for whatever they want to use it for ... that's how they make their money, by selling our private information.
They don't make money from users, they make money by selling their users. Users ARE the commodity they sell. Does not compute.
3
It's the startup bro-dude way - we'll do whatever we want and say sorry-not-sorry later.
4
This is what happens when you let a 32-year old child have power over our affairs.
4
Another harm that FB does is to generate news feeds that reflect what a reader already knows and believes instead of providing a balanced report. This increases the already huge divide between the left and the right. Yes, #deletefacebook
4
“I want to stress the importance of being young and technical. Young people are just smarter. Why are most chess masters under 30?” Mark Zuckerberg
I guess he must be getting older and dumber? More likely a parasitic business model is finally being realized as a con-game. This yearbook committee has always been full of devious players. Read printed books everyone. It is really cool and will make you smarter and even wise!
3
I don't know why this should come as such a big surprise, or why Facebook users are acting so outraged. The privacy issues and potential for misuse of data have been well known about all along. I made the decision a long time ago I wasn't going to join Facebook for this reason.
4
It can be hard to not be on Facebook. Some people see looking at your profile as a necessary introduction, if you are not there they view you as "less real" or having "something to hide". Never mind that there are millions of fake personas on Facebook. There are several groups that I am part of that communicate events and ideas via Facebook, merchants who expect you to use it to look at their work, etc.. Let alone folks who really don't access the internet except through Facebook (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/01/facebook-free-basics-inter.... This is particularly concerning when you consider Cambridge Analytica's role in recent elections in Kenya.
1
I don't believe a word that Mark Zuckerberg says. Why not let Facebook users have the same degree of privacy that he demands for himself? Because that wouldn't make him any money, that's why. Facebook is a cesspool. I'm surprised that anyone still uses it.
3
I hve never been a fb user, mainly out of privacy concerns. FB, Twitter, google are all part of a rotten and rotting system called "predatory capoitalsim", where the ONLY thing that matters is maximization of short term profits at ALL costs. And that includes selling your info to the highest bidder. When the greatest value is placed on profits, as in the U.S., then the people lose. These businesses hire very smart people who are paid lots of money find new ways to make more money. Period. "Its the system, stupid."
If you think FB is about your connections and life, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you in Brooklyn. Follow the money honey.
3
What is it going to take for Facebook to stop allowing companies to advertise to us based on our psychographic profiles? If this situation has illustrated anything, it's that everyone can be prodded or manipulated by advertising that can target us that with great granularity (whether for electioneering or otherwise).
They should change our account IDs, so the historic data cannot be tied to our current profiles. And they should limit how granularly they sell advertising slices about us.
If they don't do that, I'm inclined to just leave their platform. The cost isn't worth it.
16
Personally, I look forward to a day when commercials are for something I can actually purchase. Every evening watching t.v., I have to sit through commercials for women/s bladder control, Mylantra, and Geico even though I can not drive. It is a waste of everyone's time. I would be more than happy to fill out an advertising profile so that I only have to sit through commercials for Carhart pants, hydroponic supplies, and espresso. :)
18
Cancel Facebook and teach all the network privacy invaders and personal data thieves a lesson they will not forget!
4
Not nearly enough. Your greed is responsible for Trump. It’s a great day to quit Facebook!
4
oh my - where are the narcissists going to find an appropriate place to say "Look at me"
3
A mirror!
3
I have tried to delete my account. It is impossible, you may deactivate it but Facebook will not allow you to delete your account. The captchas that they provide, when entered simply give you an error code. I entered over 30 captchas and none worked. When I tried to delete my e-mail address that was provided to ad agencies without my consent, I can't delete it. Facebook does not allow it. Mark Zuckerberg has taken personal information, that is a requirement to sign up, and used it for his personal monetary gain without the user's knowledge nor consent.
4
I have tried for 2 years to delete my account and even wrote my state attorney general. No luck. I still get messages from Facebook about people sending me posts, etc.
"The captchas that they provide, when entered simply give you an error code."
Do you any web browser extensions installed? If so, try restarting without them.
The only way is to delete the FB related email and change your email on all your accounts.
There have been no reports about commercial FB accounts. Is there any reason to believe that there have not been any breaches in corporate FB accounts.
Look right here at these NYT comments. I wonder how many FB "likes" have been generated at the bottom of each comment. What is really going on is a cross-referencing between a relatively anonymous NYT account and the compromised FB security. Then multiply that by every visitor to every commercial FB site. It is very sobering.
The premise for data harvesting, under the guise of companies needing it to "better tailor marketing for individuals" has always been out there, and is why one's data gets sold. People who overshare personal information, accept apps without checking privacy etc, or think anyone has any real privacy online, shouldn't be surprised.
The larger, more significant and important issue, is how the Russians created numerous fake accounts on Facebook through which they used the targets they identified through the data mining to spread false, and defamatory, information; this makes Facebook a party to libel and fraud.
2
An indigenous People I met believe that sharing their information with just anyone, revealing their birth names, allowing images to be taken and shared allows that 'just anyone' to steal their power and make them weak and malleable. They may not have our technology, but they are light years ahead of us in the thinking game and their knowledge of the human species.
Education, real education, being taught how to think critically, take a deep breath and step back, learn how accumulate wisdom, instead of just reacting is what is missing in our societies. These companies make billions because people react instinctively, like Pavlov's dogs, instead of bringing thought into the equation (the supposed difference between man and beast). This habituation, instead of education of mankind is what makes data gold.
It is not data selling that presents a risk. it's human lust for instant self-gratification, and laziness, that makes mindless marks. Anyone who believed companies would not use and/or abuse their data to make billions was not thinking. What business model 'gives' (there is no obvious subscription fee for FB), pays millions in research to fine tune and practice the collection and harvesting of data, if they do not have a profitable end product in mind. The end product is the users hopes, fears, desires, connections packaged and sold to make the desires of a few the reality- nothing is for free. But, even so, the package would be useless if people learned how to think.
3
For me, these recent revelations are the straw that broke the camel's back. After 10 years of regular use, Sunday will be my last day on Facebook. I just can't do it anymore.
2
Zuckerberg/Facebook has said they would safeguard data before but they didn't.
They didn't because it doesn't fit with their business model. Facebook like all the other media platforms, is nothing but a method to exploit their users.
In this tech world, there is little hope of safeguarding data to the degree required to protect citizens.
While I think the internet has been an incredible revolutionizing creation benefitting millions of people, there needs to be accountability by these media giants. Governments need to force them but find a way also, to do this without removing what is great about the freedom with the internet.
3
Considering that Trump supporter Peter Thiel was one of Mark Zuckerberg's first and most prominent investors, and has been on his board of directors, Zuckerberg may have turned a blind eye on all of this on purpose.
3
Zuckerberg did the Silicon Valley Two Step and everyone played along.
This isn't about privacy, this is about Facebook and Zuckerberg making billions off user information. This none sense about preventing none authorized entities from getting their hands on user data is the a fantasy.
Everyone says we're an over regulated nation, but Zuckerberg is now the poster child for why "self regulation" doesn't work. It's like AOL promising to stop retaining user chats, only to discover they continued to collect and store them for 2 years after the promise. Facebook made similar promises on their platform.
Now we have Republicans in Congress and the FCC who want to give free reign to ISPs to do exactly what Facebook has done, sell off user data to anyone, including data brokers who have to no moral or patriotic compunction working with potentially hostile foreign actors.
3
Finally, we get past the media-driven hysteria of Cambridge Analytica (CA). As was detailed in articles yesterday, CA's FB data harvest was not productive and was not profitably used for any candidate, including Trump. Now we finally get to the real story, how FB sells personal data to anyone with the money to pay for it, including Advertisers, Russian criminal syndicates, and Political Analysis consultants. While CNN and MSNBC have tried to make this story all about collusion between Trump and FB, I am more than just pleased that ordinary people are finally able to see what FB is really all about: selling personal user data to unscrupulous actors. Many of us already knew that.
3
Facebook has been swimming in controversies since its inception. Zuckerberg always promises to do something, but only when his back is against the wall with the law pointed at his face.
Facebook is a laboratory that explores the extreme limits of personal data sharing, and people (aka their guinea pigs) are more than willing to participate in their experiment.
Even people who don’t have accounts with Facebook are being followed online. Those little ‘share buttons’ on every single site on the web are a convenience for users yes, but they are a tracking cookie also.
Personally, if I feel a need to have friends, I go out there in the real world and find some. They keep asking me to follow them on Facebook, and I keep telling them the same thing: nope!
Facebook is a virus hidden in plain site on the web. It time to kill it.
7
Read the articles from the NYT tech writers essentially saying that deleting FB is not the solution because FB has your data anyway and so do the other apps people use (WhatsApp, Instagram, etc.). I'm not buying the Borg "resistance is futile" line. Let's admit that all of these apps are a poor substitute for face-to-face conversation or just talking over the phone. They're poorly designed for conversation and wonderfully designed to steal our privacy and make a few guys rich.
4
Get off Facebook today. Best thing you’ll ever do. Go out and talk to actual people. Make real friends. Be a human. Do it today.
11
Based on other things I had heard, I knew this was happening --the being targeted thing. I realized my shares, my comments felt like I was participating and making change, but it is false and a waste of valuable time.
I have been off Facebook for about a month, deleted my account. I don't miss it at all. I have no social media connections -- except for this and my life goes on beautifully. There are individuals I would like to contact at times; if they are only accessed through Facebook or twitter then shucks it won't be happening.
2
I am surprised that people are surprised. Deleting your facebook profile after suddenly realizing they stole your privacy is like walking out of Titanic because you expected a happy ending.
56
Anyone could see the Titanic (movie version) was going to end badly. Nearly everyone was smoking.
Well, actually, the movie "Titanic" DID have a happy ending. The two main characters -- Rose and Jack -- are reunited in the afterlife, both restored to their youthful beauty, aboard a mystically reborn Titanic filled with their friends, all dressed in elegant evening attire. Did you miss that part of the movie?
Your analogy isn't one at all. When people joined Facebook any more than a year or two ago, how and why would they know that Facebook would become what it has—a monolithic, essentially unrepentant, profit-greedy, user-disrespecting and -abusing machine, that treats its "members" as products to be monetized. The only appropriate analogy between the Titanic and Facebook is that the iceberg struck by the ship and Facebook itself was and are nearly completely hidden from our view.
1
Actually, no he didn't. He is not making any clear commitment. He is being vague. Stop with the magical thinking. What was going on during the silence? Watch people. My guess is he is being image driven, that he freaked out and tried to figure out what to say. Another option during that silence could have been investigation resulting in a clear commitment. As a business person, I know how to read this situation. Do you?. What is actually happening? HIs speech acts revealed one red flag. Money. He let us all know some kind of effort, not sure it is enough, will cost millions. He is leading with his concern about the cost, not the principle. How much did he profit from his lack of oversight? MY guess is he made that decision based on money, not values, too. His showing us his thinking about how much it this is effecting him, not you or me. Delete Facebook. He is baiting us. Pay attention people. It really isn't that hard to move away from how you feel, what you want, and what you crave to attend to what is actually happening. No commitments are being made. Just overarching politically driven promotions of asking for your trust, despite not being trustworthy. That is a red flag for any business person. So many people are motivated to persuade you to have faith, without effort. Faith without works is dead.
Zuckerberg may not have needed a higher education to get rich, but he could have used one to develop a moral compass. Greed is primitive. So is sloth and gluttony.
5
I realize this is a complicated story and that we are most familiar with FaceBook, but I do wish the major news media would stop ignoring the influence of oligarch families like the Kochs and the Mercers on our elections. Everything in the news today, for example, is all about Zuckerberg. What about Mercers? Jane Meyers' work is still a voice in the wilderness. Mercers should be household names. The only reason they are 'dark money" is because the news media has allowed them to remain in the dark. Please! These people are dangerous to democracy. Bring their activities into the light of day, often.
How Robert Mercer exploited America’s populist insurgency.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/03/27/the-reclusive-hedge-fund-t...
3
Amen…
Indeed! The Mercers, the Koch Brothers, Sheldon Adelson, Fox News, and the cock-eyed philosophy of Ayn Rand adherents, among other misguided rich guys (along with our complicit Republican politicians) have done more to undermine our democracy than we can imagine. Shine a light on these folks.... this is the real story.
1
Is it just me or does Zuckerberg look like some kind of preternatural toddler,
like a Benjamin Button who has pacted with the evil one to grow ever younger? Or is it just that since he just does exactly what he wants, he has no stress or worries, unlike the rest of us?
There are so many things wrong with FB that it's not a viable "platform" for much of anything really. Data breaches are just the tip of the iceberg--what it does to people, socially and psychologically (esp to kids) is a far worse peril for our culture.
This is what happens when children with no life experience or knowledge of ethics get control of technology and build irresponsible companies that mine the worst aspects of capitalism and then gaze placidly at the world like unwitting baby deer. We did it--Pandora's box is open, and all we can do is hang on for dear life. Life--which used to be dear.
I am very happy I have never had a farcebook account.
4
So, just to be clear, Mr. Zuckerberg's 'addressing' the situation was a Facebook post? He didn't hold a live press conference, make a statement, answer questions?
I don't know. To me, that's like begging your girlfriend to stay – after she's caught you being a bad boy – by text message.
Mr. Zuckerberg needs to see the Wizard for some courage.
4
At last! And at least!
Some accountability from the thus far untouchables of the social media. Hope it is the beginning, not the end...
Twitter didn't implode when Donald Trump started tweeting. I think Facebook should survive this...especially as a couple of hours ago, I posed a comment on Politico and I use Facebook to access the comments. But we will see.
This is a wake up call for all of us.
We need to stop trusting public companies with our personal data.
I've been using Phantom.me, an app where all my stuff is 100% secured. That way I don't give away any of my personal data, which I have had enough of doing.
This is the app for those interested: https://goo.gl/G2nPPi
But that data is already hacked and sold. Is FB liable?
1
He's sorry?
I don't accept it. The damage to our country is too great, and he's collecting Trump's tax cuts. He acted out of self-interest, I conclude.
This "apology" is pure Chutzpah.
65
He’s “sorry” about all the terrible publicity!
He has only himself to blame!
This is good news about lifting liability protections. they never should have existed. I'm looking forward to hearing Zuckerberg's explanation and the exposure of Mercer money, Cambridge Analytica,, Breitbart, Bannon and their strange horrible plans for our country. Maybe it is time to re-think the 1st Amendment and make lying to the public against the law. What's more dangerous to democracy, propaganda or guns? Mercers claimed Clinton would repeal the 1st and 2nd Amendments. It's extremely paranoid of them, but perhaps some modest restrictions are in order.
This is the arrogance of youth writ large. We life in a world where Zuckerberg, rightly celebrated for becoming a billionaire so early on, has been allowed to see himself as infallible. His extremely naive handling of Russian contacts shows an inherent immaturity, the kind of thing that actually reading real journalism and studying history would have steered him away from.
No doubt, if there is anyone at Facebook 50 or older who might have lived through this kind of folly before, I'm sure their concerns were swept away under a blanket contempt for "OldThink." On his own, Zuckerberg has deluded himself into thinking the real world can be "remapped" by "communication."
The only other alternative is that, like Assange and Bannon, he's a self-serving anarchist who wants to "tear down the administrative state" and replace it with his own arrogant rule by fiat.
At the moment, his falsely Apollonian statements point in this directions. As if his "passion" and his "dreams" justify breaking international law and opening up personal data to anyone who can afford to pay. He deserves more than a smack on the wrist from Congress. It's time for him to step down.
3
Where art thou Sheryl?
If there was ever a time in your life to LEAN IN, it is now!
4
Love your comment!
1
If men were angels, no government would be necessary.
The Federalist No. 51, James Madison
There is "nothing" angelic about Zuckerberg. When Facebook was being developed two issues were key in describing the kind of person Zuckerberg is. One: he took a substantial part of his start-up money from the Russians (a Putin back door). Two: Zuckerberg and his developers had identified early on the detrimental effects of the algorithms being used with the programming of Facebook but Zuckerberg intentionally chose to use them anyway. Even as people called him out on the effects of the design he bold faced lied about the issues.
Knowing the effects media manipulation on the public which is a well known intrusion into the "people's" freedoms and liberty... I mean a person should be able to have their own minds, regulation of media should be discussed without the monetary aspects even being a part of the discussion. Our nation's health and welfare should be paramount to the choices of a nation's government... not the money of a handful of psychopathic/narcissistic people who choose to exploit the population for power and money.
Systems of all types that are developed to be seemingly helping the country but it is only seen that way after a massive public media campaign to "brain hack" the population into wanting that system..., chemicals in food that causes addictions to the same, all of these are detrimental to the health and welfare of the public.
2
I deactivated a long time ago (for whatever that was worth).
2
One would have to be totally naive to not think revealing personal information about yourself on Facebook could be potentally problematic. Most users are all to eager to tell the world everything about themselves at least in the States. "Personal exhibitionism is the norm in this country ..."Americas's got talent"
1
There was a time when Facebook was cool, when membership was restricted to college students and the tone matched that millennial demographic: whip smart, ready for a good debate, and a little bit raunchy. Then our parents joined, and our bosses too...that made us tone things down. Then the racist idiots joined...that made it impossible to have civil conversations. Then the big media companies joined and flooded our feeds with a constant stream of posts...that made it difficult to see when our actual friends were posting. Today, Facebook just isn't fun to use. Many of us originals keep accounts because they double as an address book. But fewer and fewer of us are actually posting...or even bothering to log on.
3
As the the head of $500 billion organization Zuckerberg should have been presenting an image of leadership and responsibility. Instead of leadership though what we saw was pathetic attempt of self deprecation. What I find deeply troubling, besides Mr. Zuckerberg's inability to truly grasp the enormity of what the security breach means, is that Zuckerberg himself still believes that he can appear before the world as a t-shirt and jeans clad, college whizz kid.
Sorry Mr. Zuckerberg but that's not what the world or markets or your customers and Facebook users really want. Looking contrite and mouthing meaningless words and phrases is not understanding and fixing the problem. We are looking for the adult in charge. Clearly it is not Zuckerberg.
Mark, its time to grow up. You need to consult with some high power, intelligent and worldly executives and professionals to understand what the problems are and how you must address those problems in an adult manner. And that includes your manner of dress too. Perhaps you need a lesson in Yiddush to put this in perspective; "Zie a mench!" ...Be a man, not a boy. You're a lost child Mark and we need a man to step up. I hope that by the time you appear before Congress you get your act together. Also, why weren't you on CNBC? Where were the Facebook security experts too? And where is Cheryl Sanders? All of you are asleep at the wheel.
3
One of the things that most outrages me about this is that FB employees embedded with the Trump campaign and strategized with it to widely disseminate stories that they knew were false and that had the aim of whipping up hatred of minorities in bigots. Really unconscionable.
1
Mark Zuckerberg’s first move in building his 75 billion dollar fortune was to outright steal the idea from its originators
And, by no coincidence, his first move after the Cambridge Analytica/Russia/Trump scandal broke last week was to sell off a huge hunk of his personal Facebook shares.
Anyone who has chosen to divulge their personal information to this unethical profiteer has, by definition, no common sense or reasoning ability.... It is of little wonder that fake news stories posted by Russian trolls were so effective in swaying this clueless mass off to Trump rallies, and then to the polls to install the blathering goon into the White House.
And now, America, and the entire planet, is paying the price.
4
Companies don't prevent behavior that's never happened. Why didn't Facebook do a forensic audit themselves to determine if any of the thousands of 3rd party apps they had just restricted from "sharing" without consent -- actually had in the past and might need to be reigned in?
Expecting us to believe you prevented behavior that never happened.
That dog just won't hunt, Mark. You were negligent with donors' data; still are; always will be. It's your business model.
1
What bridge is Mr. Z wanting to sell us now?
2
What is the data? The name of your cat? What you had for lunch? In all the outrage over Facebook, I have not seen a single story or news broadcast that defines what, exactly, was stolen.
Further, if you’re providing an app or social network with info you don’t really want shared, you are likely constantly falling on your face because your head is full of rocks.
Does this make what happened okay? Absolutely not. Companies were dishonest, and Facebook is a sudden, sprawling behemoth ruled by people who made critical and unethical errors, favoring the wrong kind of damage control.
Facebook is not going away, though. Yesterday a friend of mine, in the midst of the “delete Facebook” movement, posted a close up photo of a muffin he had baked. It got 49 likes. (I’m not making this up.)
Also, Zuckerberg is likely smarter than any Congressman who will try to grill him. Or at least hugely more expert in the subject that will be covered.
This will be a process. Yes, Facebook executives need to change their whole way of thinking and behaving. In the meantime, if you don’t want to give personal data away, don’t provide it to an environment where displaying a muffin is consdered a revelation. And certainly don’t believe ads you see there, much less the news.
51
They get your location for starts which then they can use to determine whether you are in a blue-purple-or-red state. And they harvest all your likes so they can try and map your political leaning. And actually likes of general things may indicate how easily you may be persuaded. I'm sure they rinse this data pretty well to profile people. They can see who your friends are for instance and see how many are foreign versus local. And if you have foreign friends what countries they are from. It can indicate how accepting a person 'may' be with regards to other kinds of people in the world. Not a perfect science, but close enough to know what kinds of ads out to certain folk. People don't invest billions into a bunch of hogwash. If this effort did not bear fruit the Russians and others wouldn't waste the time and money on collecting and analyzing this data.
3
sure. a lot of the data are useless -- it's not what's on FB it's what FB feeds users or takes from users in a very dishonest way. And yes; FB is clearly not the only shop out there exploiting our data all over this world. When a platform becomes universal and is then used in what should be deemed illegal exploits it's surely time to lower the boom. Check out SCL Group to see how bad this can get and to see how Zuckerberg has gone too far by selling his "benign" platform
1
One of the problems I see is the language used to describe what has happened. We hear "our personal information" or "our data" on a daily basis. But that stuff is different depending on the platform and the situation.
Ask someone what they think was harvested from FB. Then ask them what was stolen from Equifax, et al. and which had the greatest impact on 1) their lives 2) the country.
In one instance a propaganda tool was created based on your own voluntary responses to stimuli and then the activity of your harvested and unwitting friends and their friends. The other was your social security number, bank accounts, etc.
Facebook doesn't owe its users anything at all. They are living in public -"liking" everything that comes their way - accepting complete strangers 'friend requests' and measuring their happiness and success in the number of stranger/friends they have and how many people 'like' their own banal posts.
How is any of this a surprise?
1
We're not in your dorm room anymore, Toto.
If the past few years have shown us anything, it is just how venal billionaires can be. From the Mercers to Zuckerberg to Trump (if he even IS really a billionaire) some people with great wealth have no inclination to use it for good. Shame on all of us for worshipping the almighty dollar.
"Although his statement addressing a chorus of criticism fell short of a full-throated apology..."
In fact, there are no words of apology at all.
3
“We have a responsibility to protect your data,” Mr. Zuckerberg said Wednesday in a Facebook post, “and if we can’t then we don’t deserve to serve you.”
That moral responsibility's always been there. The legal responsibility was laid out in a 2014 consent decree. You've never taken this responsibility seriously, and this couldn't be any clearer.
And, on top of this, you're now considering allowing the Cambridge Analytica fox back into the hen house? The same CA that was recently caught on video demonstrating their own total lack of ethical standards, disdain for the law and contempt for democracy (which really means contempt for you and me) by offering to entrap rival politicians?
You don't deserve to serve us. You deserve to serve time.
1
Hey Mark Zuckerberg! I think you're an ok guy and all, but don't you think we should just stop all the lying already? The internet has always been hackable. It was never designed not to be. Security was never its raison d'être. That was, and always has been, convenience. First, the free flow of information, and then, goods and services, or to be more succinct, money. I personally know some high level developers that claim there is no such thing as internet security. Our corporations and our government know this already. What is happening right now is not a revelation to them, or to you. Admit it. And now we know that russia (and probably china) has infiltrated our electrical power grid via, you guessed it, the internet. Question: how much money do you need Mark? Your little "social network" has made quite a splash, hasn't it? You have made an ungodly fortune plugging directly into our economy. Touche‘. Don't you think its time for you, and others, to give something back? Like channeling some of that capital into creating, with our massive but ineffectual "security" apparatus, a safer system? Or is that just another "inconvenience"?
1
Sheryl Sandberg is all over the place when she has a book to sell, but when her company is in the crosshairs she's invisible. Wasn't that long ago that Dems were floating her name as a possible presidential candidate, but I have to believe that notion is out the window. A shame, but FB has been responsible for too much evil.
82
I thought Mark at one time was on a speaking tour of American cities and also thinking about a potential run.
The Dems floated the idea of presidential runs by both Ms Sandberg and Mr Zuckerberg.
It is time for them both and the Dems to ‘lean away’ from that preposterous idea.
2
Sorry, but why or how Sheryl Sandberg was ever qualified to be a social or political leader has always confounded me, from the "lean in" business to her experience as a widow... for having a leadership role in FB does not qualify one as an everywoman professional nor as widow... no particular new universal wisdoms to be gleaned, no matter how well-intended the social messages of these social campaigns. Yet, I wish her well and hope she continues to work on her most influential role in this world as a FB executive. And fast.
Well, she briefly did work in government years ago, and is obviously far more qualified than the man who currently occupies the WH. The Dems were briefly making noise about putting up business execs who haven't declared multiple bankruptcies--Robert Iger, for instance--as candidates, and I have to think she was listening. She needs to be FB's public face on this, as Zuckerberg is just embarrassing.
Just deleted my Facebook account. Morally bankrupt operation. Never again!
1
Anyone who wants maintain "privacy" needs to understand that if you use the internet in any way, you have none. It really is that simple. Cut all of your public utilities, don't hold any bank accounts, never go to a doctor or hospital, and don't (for goodness sake) buy anything, anywhere in a retail establishment. Elsewise, you will be on the internet and accessible.
Or, get used to the idea that every action you take and information you list is accessible to others. Act accordingly.
1
Now is the time for someone to come up with an alternative to Facebook that is secure.
I only use FB with "real" friends, and I'd switch to something else in a heartbeat.
2
Quit Facebook
That's all you have to do.
Facebook is the reason we have trump
5
Facebook is like the mob. Once you're in, you're in for life. They will not let you go. I deleted my account 5 years ago, yet they still to this day send me emails informing me I have new friends.
Evil.
2
Obama obtained data from Facebook doing the same thing as Trump however there was no outrage by the liberal media then. Why the bias and double standard?
1
Proof please.
3
Cue the saccharine music.
Pan over snowswept Ivy League campus. Cut to sundrenched southern California campus.
Title: Being a Billionaire Tech Titan Means Never Having to Say You’re Sorry
Starring...
Mark Zuckerberg as Oliver Barrett IV
The rest of us as Jenny Cavalieri (dying)
1
Enough with your multiple apologies. Are you really contrite? How about something real? Like funding food stamps for a year? Or Meals on Wheels? Wake up dude! There's a whole other world out there than just making money. How much more do you have to have?
1
Isn't it amazing how this pampered billionaire, rich from his exposure of the lives of millions to public view, suddenly finds himself so reluctant to put his own whole face to the public?
2
Facebook stands for the problem with the Internet business model that has dominated e-commerce: 1) The Company does not exist to serve the customer; 2) The Company exists to makes as much money as possible doing as little as possible; and 3) Shift all liability to the user. Facebook is not sinister; it is just following the model that Gates offered in "Business at the Speed of Thought"---the customer should be grateful for having the product. This business model has come to dominate almost everything we buy and sell today: the customer is not only no longer right, s/he is not even relevant. So we now have generations of people that have never really "produced" any essential goods. Mr. Trump, that is why we have a deficit, not some sinister conspiracy among other nations.
What frightens me is that this business model now permeates even traditional companies and services; even the doctor's office makes you sign away every legal right you have, absorb all liability and submit to arbitration for disagreements at the patient's expense.
So glad I never had any interest in being part of Facebook.
We need the fall of Facebook. It is time for a customer revolution to make tech responsible to those who actually purchase the services. I don't wish Zuckerberg any ill will; it's just that he happened to be the catalyst for the needed storm.
Facebook and other social media sites are the National Enquirer of the internet. I think the biggest problem we have with them is that people actually believe the garbage they read on them. They are worse than Fox "fake" News. And does anyone really think that Facebook is going to protect your personal data when you use their site? That Americans have become so shallow and just plain stupid when it comes to sites like Facebook is the real problem here.
What privacy policies did FB users believe were in place? Was a policy written and the terms agreed to by users? Were those policy terms breached by FB?
1
Why would anyone expect their privacy be protected from a man that started to site to rate how hot women are? I’m very much looking forward to the fall of fb. Bye Felicia.
2
People act like not having social media is the end of the world. It’s actually the beginning of a better life. I deleted my accounts the day after the 2016 election and haven’t missed them whatsoever. I am glad to be having personal interactions with people I actually care about more frequently, rather than scrolling through mindless drivel or political babble of people I may have known for five minutes in high school. Bonus: Facebook isn’t using me to increase their revenue stream, because I am no longer a participant on their platform.
4
1) It is almost like Facebook possessed a unique "stem cell" line that is essential for research to enable future medical improvements throughout the human body.
2) For artificial intelligence (AI) to be applied pragmatically in marketing or politics, in order to drive this targeted marketing toward its audience; and to increase its effectiveness, huge samples of information are required. Information on 50 million Facebook users may have been compromised. By controlling access to this data inventory, Facebook can help determine which political party triumphs or which consumer marketing campaigns succeed.
Where else is such a compendium of data available to better predict how segments of the total population of 325 million Americans will react to marketing or political ploys, at least partly designed by very sophisticated AI- directed software programs?
3) Since "continuous improvement" drives the marketing of marketing and politics, and attempts to improve the accuracy of ROIs on very expensive corporate ad and political campaigns a given today; how do you extinguish or even dampen the eternal need for more and more data from more and more consumers and voters, gathered to reduce errors in these very expensive ads and political campaigns? It would seem to be a chore for Mr Zuckerberg, as Sisyphus, himself.
[JJL 10:36am Th 03/22/2018 Greenville NC]
1
The creation of information silos Facebook employs is the most egregious and harmful aspect of the platform, as I see it.
There was a time, not eons ago, when USA citizens got their news from a very few sources e.g. a few TV channels and a few newspapers and a few local AM radio stations. It might be argued the information then was less filtered.
True, when one read the newspaper, it was easy to skip items.
So with newsprint, a type of information silo could be found to exist.
Listening to AM radio gave you had little control of the topics.
That lack of control still exists, but nowadays AM radio has been generally homogenized by the IHeartMediaInc/Clear Channel right leaning cartel.
So, for many who listen to AM talk radio now, there is a forced participation in a right leaning information silo.
Years ago, before DVRs and even VCRs, watching TV news forced common information on the viewer and led to a common citizen experience.
Obviously, the present day ability to pick and choose news content to solidify personal views has led to the polarization and paralysis of one being "open minded".
As I see it, the tailored news feed is the worst aspect inherent in the Facebook platform and the removal of this feed might be helpful toward liberating users from the toxicity of information silos.
Since many solely get their news from Facebook, it could be argued removal could cause users to receive less daily news, but I submit no news might be better than polarized or fake news.
2
In his excellent book "The Facebook Effect", David Kirkpatrick covers the history of Facebook. From the start, Mark Zuckerberg didn't believe that privacy was an issue. As a result, Facebook was not designed with privacy features. The privacy features that exist were all grafted on after the fact.
Facebook is not the only social network available, however. The nderground social network (nderground.net) was designed from the start with privacy in mind. On nderground only the people who are in my direct group see my posts and photographs. There is no leakage of information to "friends-of-friends". So if you're tired of Facebook, there are other alternatives.
1
No, Mark. We don't believe you. Didn't believe you then; don't believe you now. You are like a spoiled child who continuously gets away with behaving badly, and this, Mark, never ends well.
2
It appears people have not understand what Facebook's (and other social media companies') business model is: they provide a "free" platform so people post their personal information on it so that they can use it, sell it, monetize it and do with it whatever they want in order to make money, regardless of any ethical restraint and without any regulation. It is that simple. The sophistication in the mean of "sucking" people's personal information has only multiplied exponentially. How we remain so gullible, so "stupid" and so surprised at the fact that Facebook hid this (and God knows how much more) for years is beyond me.
4
This is an emblematic case of what can happen with technology in the "free" economy.
The user believes Facebook is a cool way to keep in touch with family and friends, express her or himself, and be part of a community of sorts.
Facebook believes the user is merely providing raw material for making money from crunching data, privacy be damned.
The purchasers and manipulators of data and data streams are 'merely' following their unquenchable greed or promoting secret agendas, domestic or international.
But in reality millions upon millions of people alienated from their real lives (which increasingly take place in wastelands called malls & factories & offices & schools & homes) become cultural and existential refugees on Facebook and live vicariously, except for jerky moments when they do interact and in some way score -- tantamount to becoming the semi-robotic 'living dead'.
Meanwhile in the mental sphere the immense surge of truthiness (taking as truthful what sounds plausibly like truth)-- that most subtle and dangerous perversion of the truth -- gets made & magnified & multiplied on social media, of which Facebook is a mainstay.
And the truth is like the keel of the ship, without it the ship will go astray, eventually smashing onto the rocks.
Already sanity and sobriety and principle are flying out into outer space like archaic debris.
Never has de-humanization struck us with more sudden force.
Never has it been more urgent to react.
Never have we been less prepared.
1
It is nice to see that people are finally catching on to what facebook is (besides an instrument of narcisism): A tool for corporate surveillance of you and your life. If this relatively minor infarction has brought to light the facts of facebook's basic business model, then it is excellent news.
People now need to start thinking about worst case scenarios - use of facebook by a corporation teamed with a government to suppress democracy and silence the government's critics. This scenario is not far fetched.
1
I knew Facebook had my number the minute I saw those ads for boots pop up. And no one had to look very far or hard to discern my political leanings. I was vociferous in my denouncement of Trump on Facebook in the run-up to the election. But soon after the inauguration, I gave up my mission to save political souls via Facebook. Too late anyway. And I haven't been back in over a year. Facebook was not only a Russian tool, it was a major time suck. Every time I'd get off it, I'd think, well, that's 20 minutes of my life I'll never get back. Sometimes I feel a slight FOMO, but the feeling passes.
I'm just glad the NY Times, unlike other new media, does not have any Like Us on FB button. Thank you NY Times. Keep up the good job of reporting and stories and I will keep supporting you.
1
I do not have a FB account but I can't help but chuckle at some of the comments with the highest number of recommends. One thinks subscribers could pay $10 a year. Really? The price of two cappachinos for a year? Another thinks users are owed something for using a free service. Talk about entitled.
3
I'm glad I never have had Facebook.
Are people really afraid they won't be able to communicate with friends/relatives? The phone and sending letters worked for many years.
It's just that people don't want to take the time, since they are always in a hurry.
Photos can be sent other ways, too.
3
I was expecting a more colorful comment.
Thanks, Mark.
Keeping all the stuff FB knows about me private - that is for sale to a private company to use privately in whatever way they tell you privately - makes a BIG difference.
After all, now that you've learned to manipulate people you can keep the promises you made to your shareholders and make the rich even richer.
So glad I'm a part of that.
We all know that law enforcement harvests all kinds of data from social media that they use in investigations. When it helps them catch a predator or thief we are happy.
Just know that if there are bad actors out there of any kind, within law enforcement or otherwise, they can and will use the same data to harm you.
For example, they can tell who your best friends are. If they don't like you, they can go after these friends, put them in a compromising situation, then concoct ways to set you up (i.e frame you). It happens. There is a lot of hatred floating around out there and any platform that allows people to get even will be used to do just that. Trust me, I know. Look at what the CEO of Cambridge Analytical admitted to on the secretly recorded video.
1
Facebook's Zuckerberg "pledges" ? Promises ? Both are hollow. We need privacy laws to be enacted and existing laws to be enforced.
8
Why is everyone upset at facebook? because they got caught? ALL social networks do the same data-harvesting.
Nobody was bothered when they did it to sell you shoes that don't fit, instead of presidents that are unfit.
We need the law + political will to catch up with the digital era + people to learn they are not sharing on a public place, not with friends. Just zip up.
6
I realize Mr. Zuckerberg is a genius, and that his product had, and still has great possibilities, but this is what happens when a teenager gets fabulous wealth and power. He has not acquired the wisdom required to manage his product, nor has he the community to teach it to him, and neither do any of the rest of us, who have all willingly jumped on his bandwagon. We are all really naive if we think Facebook is simply a virtual "hanging out talking to the neighbors over the garden fence." Time to grow up and realize that there are those who will use anything and everything we say about ourselves to their advantage—because they are sociopaths.
6
This will never work. Facebook was built to sell space to anyone and to collect user data to sell to anyone. It was a brilliant business model
that relied on user's ego to tell all their friends everything about themselves.
Either this will continue unabated or Facebook will be regulated
by the government.
3
Dump facebook and all other social media until "push" technology is outlawed. Push technology allows anyone who does business with these internet giants to push information into OUR computers, phones, televisions, "smart" features and pull out all OUR personal information.
Users - WE THE PEOPLE - must decide who gets access to OUR personal information - not BIG profiteers.
If you bought a door would you expect every person who works at the store and the people from every company who does business with them to be able to just walk into your house? Of course not. That is what these internet behemoths are doing.
It is NOT acceptable.
9
I am not on Facebook but I do have friends who have me on their contact lists. Apparently, Facebook is still "harvesting" all of my data. That should be made illegal today, if it isn't already illegal. Then somebody should write a program that unlinks Facebook to all of the apps that are entwined with it. It's horrifying how many tentacles this monster has.
3
I agree, Joanna. I have asked my family/friends not to say anything about me, or post photos, on facebook or any social media. The other day my son proudly told me he was talking to me through Amazon echo and I asked him not to do it again.
Sure enough, I started getting spam mobile phone messages and my e-mail has been stuffed with junk.
It makes me furious. All I want to do is be able to e-mail my family/friends in privacy.
Look at all these BIG money boys and girls. They buy islands, hundreds of prime acres or live in secure/private neighborhoods, to hide out because they do not want THEIR privacy invaded. You can bet nobody gets into their computers if they don't want them there. What a bunch of phonies.
2
Social media is the Benedict Arnold of our times. One subscriber closing their accounts won't make a difference. We need to make them all go away and living real, community lives.
4
The bottom line is simply: anything and everything you send into cyberspace (i.e., "post") is public property. There is no such thing as security, even if encrypted with 128-bit key access. If anyone wants to be a member of FB, or Instagram, or Twitter, or anything else that's not desktop-resident ONLY, all discussions about "privacy" are moot. In that, Facebook's done no more than bring the matter to public attention. There's no way, technically speaking, they can fix it. Your choices are a binary solution set: either (a) accept that being on FB puts your personage in the hands of others, or (b) don't signup for social media. I've opted for (b). It seems to be working just fine.
5
FB is incredibly good at appearing to be harmless. That's the hook. Even now, with all of this information coming out and the extent of FB lack of ethics, clear absence of respect for consumers, no driving set of values that is in line with human rights and privacy, there is no collective howl even from hard left progressives. If any other corporation was doing what FB has done with user information - to the tune of 15 million from the Mercers to finance CA's unethical actions - the left would be organizing boycotts and moving elsewhere. But both the left and right wing factions are seduced by FB's appearance of innocuousness. Anyone with half a brain and coding know-how should be working to create a network non-profit where people truly control their information completely and where you pay a fee to belong so it can be advertisement-free, not "open source" (read "no privacy") right now.
5
Why rely on Facebook to preserve your privacy? Open your account with nothing but essentials required for validation (if there is any of that in the first place).
2
"Open your account with nothing but essentials required for validation (if there is any of that in the first place)."
If you don't know what is "required for validation", why are you offering "advice"?
In fact, Facebook requires a "Mobile number or email" to create an account. That is obvious from the facebook.com home page.
But I don't believe that's how Facebook works. All they need is an email address and they can use that to get all of your other information. That's why all these companies send you an email to verify that you have a real account. It's not because they think you're a Bot. You've already confirmed that you're human by typing in the three or four characters they display. It's so they can start tracking you. Also, just as an aside if you have Kaspersky anti-virus, get rid of it.
AH!! GLY. Emotion, emotion, emotion. Your read what you wanted to read. All I said is open with minimum -- not one specific for you to hang your negative hat on. But you could not resist.
Facebook is already the most potent platform for extremist propaganda that's ever been invented.
But this opens new possibilities, new avenues for destroying American democracy. Right-wing organizations could use what Facebook knows to literally blackmail political opponents into not voting.
I deleted my Facebook years ago when everything from Amazon to the New York Times was trying to connect to it -- it became obvious that this company was going to know more about me individually than I wanted anybody outside my circle of friends and family to know.
I would suggest you all do the same, NOW. #DeleteFacebook
14
I quit FB in 2008 right after it left up, for a week or more, a page discussing, with enthusiasm, when the first black president was going to be assassinated. That's when I realized that FB is not anyone's friend - and it is not to be trusted - ever. Listening to zuckerberg confirms that all over again.
"Facebook is already the most potent platform for extremist propaganda that's ever been invented."
That's ridiculous. Books, newspapers, radio, and television have all been used to spread propaganda of various kinds. What makes Facebook any different?
People love innovations which enable them to communicate so easily and in so many ways. People love to make those innovations and profit from doing so. But to keep it safe means addressing all the plausible ways the innovation can do harm before setting it loose. Right now, this does not happen. The latest bright ideas have been implemented and masses of people’s identities have been opened to criminal use, or driverless cars blunder into accidents on public thoroughfares. Unsafe practices are standard practices in this area of commercial activity.
1
I don't get it. Can somebody explain to me how I can be damaged by someone using personal information about me that I freely give to FB (if I were on FB, which I am not) to target me with some personal message to sell me a product that the information suggests that I might be interested in buying or to persuade me to get out and actually vote for a political candidate that my personal information suggests that I probably support . It could be a bit of nuisance but no more so than junk mail in my mail box and I am free to ignore it. So how am I harmed? And has anyone sued FB claiming that he was harmed because FB didn't protect his data?
Of course, I can see how someone can be harmed by someone using someone else's data. If I were a Hillary supporter, and Cambridge Analytica used data to target perceived Trump supporters to get them out to vote for DT, and were effective, I might well consider myself harmed by what it did. But what would give me the right to complain about that? With regard to that I am just a bystander. And if Hillary's campaign was doing it as well, like Obama's in 2012, (and if not, why not?), she would be the one that would be using my data and targeting me.
Clearly, this is just another bogus issue concocted by the Left to blame something other than the fact that Hillary was a lousy candidate and ran a lousy campaign for her loss. Anyone that is concerned about his or her privacy can leave FB. The rest can keep on trucking.
It’s not just about you, or anyone’s personal data being a tool to advertise manipulation, the information is going to Russia who is interfering in an American election. This is treasonous, and your candidate knew it.
You don't get it? I can explain it to you.
You're a swing voter. The Trump campaign sends you a message on FB, claiming that Hillary wants to make it more expensive for you to pursue your favorite hobby. Now, this is not true. It's a lie. But only you, and a small number of other people, who have the same hobby, ever see this. You won't be reading in the paper, or anywhere else, that its not true. The Clinton campaign doesn't know that Hillary is being slandered, and can't react in any way. You're being lied to. It's hard for you to find out, that you're being lied to.
Oh, and by the way: if you want to buy something online; Something you need for that favorite hobby. All websites 'know' how much this hobby means to you. You're gonna see special prices. Specially high. On all websites. You are going to pay those extra high prices, because you don't know better. You get gouged (and FB gets a cut). You don't see how that harms you?
Why is anyone surprised? Remember that Mark Z basically stole the idea for the application from people who he was working with - that goes a long way to showing his true character. Then the profitability of FB is based on selling user data and/or using that data to sell ads custom tailored to the user. The entire platform is nothing but a means to access user data and create a social graph that can be used to characterize people, their behavior, and then use that to sell targeted ads. Furthermore, FB has found ways to keep users engaged (likes, etc.) and thus spend more time on the platform - kind of like an addiction - just to be able to sell more ad-time. Anyone who does not understand this has had their eyes closed.
14
The entire business of Facebook is selling the information it knows about its users, who are not it’s customers. They can’t keep you safe, when selling you is their business.
Further, again and again, Facebook does not possess the internal controls nor the moral compass to do anything but initiate a cover up when your information leaks. Everything about Cambridge Analytica was known by Facebook years ago, yet they didn’t begin to address it until it was covered in the press.
You may have friends on Facebook, but Facebook itself is the enemy of privacy and of its users.
5
And yet if Congress tries to enact legislation that makes this data-harvesting illegal, as Europe does, most people will scream SOCIALISM. We reap what we sow.
5
Facebook's promise of bringing people together has always been a Trojan Horse to steal our privacy. I deleted FB when I got snookered into partially filling out a "fun questionnaire to see how well my friends knew me" before realizing that answers were information that only I would know and was meant to steal my identity. Worse, children are not sophisticated enough to see through Facebook's deceptive practices.
5
Let's not forget that Zuckerberg was the same guy who posted his classmates photos online without permission at Harvard and later stole the idea for Facebook. Moreover, Facebook embedded their staff with the Trump campaign to help them win the election, showing them all of the ways to exploit their data. Then they waited for 2 years to own up to this disaster, only after it broke in the news and they could no longer ignore it. For months Facebook denied any influence on the election - a complete lie. I'm not buying their contrition.
113
We also need remember why he was posting his classmates photos without their knowledge- to rate the women according to heir sex appeal. This creep should already be in jail.
I've come across this allegation more than once lately, and it deserves to be repeated: "Facebook embedded their staff with the Trump campaign to help them win the election..."
Facebook, Cambridge Analytica, and the Trump campaign IN THE SAME ROOM strategizing on how best to apply the trove of stolen FB data to bring about Trump's election. The FB data was originally supplied to a Russian-American psychologist at Cambridge for "research purposes." The Russian-American researcher then transferred (sold?) the data to Cambridge Analytica.
Gee, another Russian in the mix. I'm so surprised. ;-)
I have never trusted Facebook, I do not belong to any social media and I do not have 5000 friends or a following. Poor me.
Today I feel vindicated.
8
We can't vote Putin or Trump out of office.
But America needs to end its love affair with Mark Zuckerberg.
Today.
Dump your Facebook page.
6
He's very very sorry and won't let it happen again.
Yeah.
4
Zucker sure has that "we must do better" speech down pat, doesn't he. It's been trotted out how many times in the last year? His ego is so big that he actually believes his company is keeping you protected. Based on what? Because no one can sucker the Zucker? Because he's so clever he'll see it coming. More likely it's because he has an "oh, well...we screwed up" attitude and relies on the consumers' short memory.
I never saw the benefits of FarceBook (or Twiddle). It seemed like a non-stop exercise in self promotion and ego. How can anyone still think these platforms are beneficial? How many times does your data need to be stolen and misused for nefarious purposes before you start pulling back from the surge of social media. I love the descriptors used - mined, scraped - call it what it is. THEFT!
Technology is neither good nor evil. It is the humans behind it that are as opaque as a tinted car window. Complain all you want about He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named but don't ignore the other tin gods who sell you a pig in a poke and laugh all the way to bank.
3
Facebook is a half-trillion dollar global business. 'I didn't know' and 'I'm sorry' aren't good enough anymore.
6
I never understood the appeal of Facebook. Seems to be mostly insecure people attempting to portray their lives as interesting and meaningful. If it was able to influence how people voted for the POTUS, then that is proof that most Facebook followers are indeed mindless sheep.
2
This is not news. Obama's 2012 campaign did something very similar although not as deceptive. When you downloaded the Obama app, it took all your data and your friend's data and used it to target ads to your friends in the form of communications from you. Not quite as disingenuous as a personality test but from the point of view of your Facebook friends whose data went to a poltical campaign without their knowledge or permission, exactly the same. Obama's team was lauded for innovative use of social media. I'm a Never Trumper but the different reaction to what Cambridge Analytica did is quite striking and looks pretty hypocritical to me.
2
Zuckenberg's prior co-owner was interviewed last night. He claimed Zuckenberg knew about the problems and exposure since @2011 and did nothing until caught.
That's the pattern. I was rarely on FB and one entire IT dept. w/whom I worked in at a major tech company refused to go on it. They're corrupt and lie like other corporations and get away with it. Leave FB.
3
I would suggest that the FB Board of Directors tell Mr. Zuckerberg that he is going to go to Washington and speak to Congress. He does not get a pass on this sickening privacy data breech that he has known about for several years. His apology to FB users is not enough and pretty transparent since the only reason he apologized is due to the billions of dollars that FB lost on Wall Street. Stop with the apologies and fix FB!
1
I deleted Facebook from my life during the 2016 campaign. I haven't regretted it for a second. In fact I should have done it sooner. Its a silly platform that takes everything from you (because you provide it for nothing) and gives next to nothing back. Unless of course you enjoy pictures of peoples food.
3
Problem with Facebook is that it has always been an arrogant, dishonest, herding platform.
They have no phone numbers, no customer service, no respect for their customers. Folks are herded like sheep en masse and then offered to whomever might monetize the flock.
Zuckerberg doesn't care about anybody but himself; He has emerged because his take is in danger.
If he really cared he would set up customer service(s), have available phone lines -- and listen, really listen, to the "herd."
89
And where is Sheryl Sandberg?
1
Facebook probably has a customer service dept. but it's not for the users or rather content creators Their customers are advertisers and other companies like Cambridge Analytics who buy or use the data that we've provided (free) to Facebook.
1
Our media desperately needs regulations. We know republicans won’t do it they can’t do much of anything. So I did what I could and deleted my account.
If corporations are people, Facebook deserves jail time
2
So I guess Sheryl Sandberg didn't lean in when it really counted and she needed to know what her company was doing, i.e. accepting money from Russian agents.
3
Does Facebook charge membership fees to join their network? NO. How does Facebook earn their revenue? This is all about pinpoint targeted advertising. Facebook makes a fortune charging companies who want access to their user base. Same with Alphabet (Google). Every time to do a search and click on an
item you like, Alphabet charges that company a fee whether you buy the item or not. There is no privacy ANYWHERE ON THE INTERNET. Everything can be exploited, manipulated and misleading. Ditto for your email. Wonder why you get so much junk mail? Everyone should have 2 email addresses. One for all your personal info that you only share with friends; the other when you buy things on the internet and forced to fork out.
3
Remember that in developing Facebook's precursor, Facemash, from online photos of Harvard students, Zuckerberg faced expulsion and was charged by the Harvard administration with breach of security, violating copyrights, and violating individual privacy. Tigers don't change their stripes.
2
It's admirable that Mr. Zuckerberg acknowledges Facebook's shortcomings when it comes to protecting data. But his cavalier attitude toward customer protection ended up having real consequences. Considering the enormous amount of money Facebook has amassed thanks to members' data, he should step up and send $1,000 to every Facebook member — sort of like compensatory damages for allowing information to flow so freely unchecked.
Where's the personal responsibility? If you expose yourself to the internet, people may use the information you share for their own purposes. Don't claim to be surprised.
I love the revelation of his quote.
“We have a responsibility to protect your data,” Mr. Zuckerberg said Wednesday in a Facebook post, “and if we can’t then we don’t deserve to serve you.”
In light of the fact their business model dictates that users are their products NOT their customers, they act to protect your data so they can be the exclusive merchants of it. It also clearly reveals he means the word "serve" as what one does with a turkey at a feast.
2
I will believe Mr, Zuckerberg the moment he and his lawyers file suit against Robert and Rebecca Mercer, Steve Bannon, Donald Trump and Cambridge Analytica for misuse of their platform and any additional charges that can be brought.
When Mr. Zuckerberg does that I will buy stock in his company, install Facebook on my devices, and wish Mr. Zuckerberg well in his future, regulated, endeavors.
1
Zuckerberg pledges privacy ?
Why all these years they accept multiple profiles ans millions with fake names and allow them in FB ?
I personally know of several who set up accounts with fake names , I am sure Zuckerberg knew of those.
Yet, he denied all those only to count his billions. when some executives pointed those out to him and to Sheryl Sandberg but they never paid any attention to all the warnings !
Why ?
Some of us do FB only to keep connected to family members who are scattered all over the World and they took advantage of that and shame on them.
Damage has been done already !
2
I closed my Facebook account yesterday, and the only regret is not doing it sooner. This company has gorged on cash deals that involved violations of privacy and outright scams for decades now. Ironically, most Facebook junkies don't even realize the problem exists because Facebook controls their content...
5
Zuckerberg is a very cynical and manipulative person whose lack of an ethical compass was clear from the beginning when he pirated the idea from others when in his dorm room. His business model uses free, confidential personal information of FB users for profit. Brilliantly, diabolical concept that is completely devoid of ethical practices or concerns. If every user had the option of completely restricting the use of his or her data from manipulation by FB to sell advertising, the company would be gone. His lame explanation and promise to do better is yet another hollow promise.
Please ask yourself if you need to use FB. Oh, and if you decide to delete your account you will immediately confront the cynicism of its founder because what should be an easy and intuitive process is not. That fact should motivate those who want to delete, not just deactivate their accounts to "lean in" even harder and go through the Byzantine process of deleting.
5
In my UX, It’s about the Benjamins and selling out users to boost profits
Nice work, "disruptors." You've disrupted trust, privacy, public comity, and the truth.
2
There are going to be lawsuits galore against this company that will bring it down. it is allow about getting information for sales of vendor's products. Now it has to pay. Government must regulate this whole industry
2
Trust a member of the Cosmopolitan Elite, not in a big hurry to believe anything Mark Zuckerberg professes.
1
If this article shows anything, its how weak Zuckerberg is. He doesn't have what it takes to actually lead.
4
One can actually live and function just fine without FB and/or any other anti-social media platform. Really.
"Time to Say Goodbye"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4L_yCwFD6Jo
3
Privacy issues should be the primary concern when it comes to social media sites. That is why I have never joined Facebook, Twitter, etc. You never really know what they are doing with it. Social media require personal information but they are not being regulated on how they manage or distribute the data they collect. At least with banks there are strict regulations on privacy issues and the companies can be penalized with fines and have reputational risks and consequences. When Facebook mishandles or allows breach of data, what are the repercussions?
1
The internet has few business standards and legislatures are populated by people who are mostly ignorant of science and technology who don’t understand what is going on. It’s going to take time for any discipline and order to make internet businesses and practices reliable and trustworthy. Don’t provide information on-line and not be unprepared for anyone to become familiar with it.
1
You’re right. If you can’t protect my privacy you don’t deserve to serve me. Rethinking why I continue to use Facebook.
1
Facebook is an information sharing business. The last thing Mr. Zuckerberg wishes to disclose is how Facebook uses and shares the information account holders provide to generate Facebook revenues and profits. Those are the details however that the public deserves to know in order to protect themselves.
1
Without reading through the 1,344 comments so far, I'm assuming many have remarked that Facebook provides no service necessary for anyone. It will go the way of Yahoo and AOL and be irrelevant to our continuing use of the internet.
4
Now when people ask if I’m on Facebook, I can answer “No” and not have to feel like I need to apologize for it.
Thanks, Mark!
4
I've never apologized. I'm proud to not be a "sheeple". So I miss a couple of parties or reunions. I'll live.
Zuckerberg your apologies don't cut it and didn't cut it when you appeared before the Senate Intel Committee and shrugged off the fact that you and the rest of our social media became a weapon that Putin hackers used against America and Americans. You were asked to publish the source of your political ads and you would not even do that much for us.
FB users have to realize no matter what Zuckerberg does internally as far as user privacy it is a sham. Your personal data being sold by FB is what keeps them operating as a billion dollar industry. If you decide to continue to use FB your personal data will be sold and may end up in third or fourth party hands afterward.
FB should not have allowed third parties and Cambridge Analytica to use your data in the first place, and 50 million users suing FB would certainly make them put their country and its people over their humongous profits as these humongous profits would start disappearing from their radar. They already took a hit because of all this.
The FCC needs to regulate this industry and they need a cyber security commission or agency to help them work with private industry on this. This was suggested by former CIA Director John Brennan and he is an authority on our national security.
1
It's not nefarious. My views and tastes get added to the whole and therefore I am represented---- If only my political views could receive as much representation!
"The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars / But in ourselves, that we are underlings.”
Facebook influencing or shaping opinion, it isn't working here, thank you.
What Facebook does to make money, is they sell their user's data to their customers. Facebook promising their users "better" privacy, is like a turkey farmer promising the turkeys "better" slaughtering.
1
Mark Zuckrtberg and Facebook MUST use their power and $ billions to sue Cambridge Analytical, its principals and other similar violators into oblivion. Words mean nothing in their world.
They shouldn’t let Zuckerberg speak publicly. He was awful on the CNN interview.
2
Too late. Im going with what's behind door 2 - the NO Facebook life.
2
Contrary to the headline, this is not Facebook's "worst crisis yet." We are living daily through American democracy's worst crisis. The stakes are far higher than the viability of a tech company.
1
I stopped using Facebook months ago, retaining my account only for one particular group that is planning an event. I don't read others' updates, I don't post, I don't bother with the news feed. And I haven't missed it a bit.
Facebook is the epitome of a time sink that truly has minimal value in our lives. There is so much low quality garbage shared there, so many scams masquerading as quizzes, so much oversharing...and now we are seeing how much worse the consequences can be.
1
I am still trying to decide if I want to keep my Facebook account. I enjoy some of it, but over the last two years it has become populated with radicals who read and spread fake news and post demeaning and dishonest material. Zuckerberg and his shareholders are making a fortune and allowing unethical influences like Cambridge Analytica and other Russian bots to roam Facebook Land at will and with the obvious result--Trump in the White House. I'm not sure that I want to be part of that world any longer.
2
Hey New York Times --
You really want to be at the forefront of this important and critical social wave -- ??
Here's a suggestion -
Remove the Facebook icon link from the sharing menu which appears at the top of all your pages - and announce that it will remain removed until such time as Facebook actually makes the very significant changes to its modus operandus which everybody is demanding -
How about it...?
4
We are witnessing the GOP reaping what it has sowed for a long time. Unregulated out of control FB maximizing profit at the cost of our electoral democracy, the NRA having complete freedom to spread weapons of war into the hands of confused teenagers, a virtually berserk president unprepared and unable to grasp the magnitude of his responsibility. Congratulations GOP hail mighty Ryan Connell Koch Industries, monied convos, you have been successful in destabilizing the democracy and reputation United States of America.
3
New movie ideas for Aaron Sorkin/David Fincher:
- The Social Contract
- Network Redux
- We Need to Talk about Mark
- Citizen Zuck
- I Am Data
- Mad Mark: Beyond the Menlo Dome
- American Data Gangster
Other suggestions welcome.
2
Mr. Zuckerberg needs to realize he's not the insouciant young thing anymore. He's an adult who created and failed to control a vehicle for spying and propaganda. Lose the t-shirts and be a man, or turn it over to men and, oh, yes, women who who know what responsibility means.
4
Here's a problem. Deleted my FaceBook, then a friend saw a FaceBook page that was active showing information that looked like I originated it. I did not. Someone took my information and created a FaceBook page. The only way for me to contact FaceBook and complain, little good that would do, is to loggin to my old account, which re-activates it!! There is no way to report such a hack to FaceBook without being a member. Maybe to the FTC??
7
What happened to having a good time? No seat belts. No helmets. Living free and jamming with the buddies. Marijuana is LEGAL in all the cool places you’d want to go. Seems like too many people these days are gazing into their little boxes and missing out on some of the best parts of being Young Americans. Maybe these revelations will start to change that. It’s time to get out of the dork maze.
2
What do I need this facebook time-waster? To hook up with people I new when I was 8?
3
People go on Facebook, blab their most personal information to the whole world - excuse me; to their 829 'friends' - then wonder why their privacy is not secure. C'mon people, if you don't want your personal information out there, then don't put it out there.
4
Ten years ago I was a reluctant FB user. Shut down my account because of the smarm factor (over-disclosure, meanness), Watching Mark Z I detected NO sincerity, nor any trustworthiness in his words or demeanor. When I checked last night, FB still “knows”me. That’s really smarmy.
1
No longer on face book! Bye. I'll have coffee with friends and pay cash!
1
there's another one we have no control over and far more frightening in a personal way....Equifax etc... at least with FB we can remove ourselves (very slowly)
2
And....people, stop depending on and blaming everyone else for disseminating your personal information. If it bothers you to have your information shared with other companies, don't give it to them. And, when you are reading ads and "articles" try to remember to check the source. It really is pretty easy to figure out if the information is coming from a reliable news outlet. All this outrage is nuts. People have become too lazy to do their own homework. Zuckerberg and Sandberg are two of the smartest minds in American business. Stop picking on them.
Anyone who thinks Zuckerberg’s appology is anything more than PR is either naive or delusional. He doesn’t care and he never has.
2
Why not charge a 3.00 user fee when somebody wants to post on FB? A better business model that will keep the riff raff out. Advertising starts with a 100,000 tax per day. Only the Russians can afford that. After a while, nobody needs FB.
Although Facebook has no credible excuses by selling it's customers as a product to make money, it is to little too late now to make amends. This company needs supervision and regulation to do the right thing, respect the independence of news to tell the truth based on facts and show us the sources. Or better yet, get out of it's "News Media' business altogether; just work on it's social connections, recognizing it needs to insert propaganda to make a living. But becoming filthy rich by selling our privacy must have some moral ground...unless the public specifically is informed about the price, 'pay to play'. Just look at the disgraceful results thus far, giving us the most incompetent bully to date...creating chaos by twittering away, lying and insulting any and all that dare criticize his graft, however constructively...and getting away with it by distracting us and finding scapegoats to all his impulsive nonsense.
They weren't outraged when Obama took and used everyone's data on Facebook. No they praised the fact and bragged about it. If Trump used just a portion of the user data not even close to the billion ppl Obama used. It's suddenly become a horrible tragedy and an abuse. Keep trying NY times.
1
another comparison. we are talking about mark.
1
Nobody had a problem when Obamas team mined facebook for data. They were praised for being hip and cool. Funny how its not so hip and cool anymore.
2
Russian fake news permeating FB. Breaches of privacy. What's not to like about FB?
2
I have a philosophical question for the authors of this article, editors of NYT and readers!
Do you really think that anything will be done by our elected leaders?
Both the Hillary, Sanders and Trump campaigns were offered access to Facebooks data base. Only the Trump campaign took advantage. We know this because of the extensive reporting by the media after the election. So this article is just a different twist on old news. (Really... that's all this story is... old news!)
With this in mind, I doubt that our Democrats, Liberals, Republicans, or Conservative leaders will actually pass enforceable legislation that has meat!
Think about it: Our leaders want to drum up hatred for the 2nd Amendment? Facebook! Our leaders want to drum up support for a war? Facebook! Our leaders want to learn intimate details about a voter? Facebook! Our leaders want a candidate elected? Facebook!
In the past, when our leaders wanted support for a war, they used the newspapers, then added television. Now they added the Internet. That's a powerful tool for controlling the masses - who are so easily distracted and confused!
http://www.wired.co.uk/article/chinese-government-social-credit-score-pr...
Facebook privacy is an oxymoron!
4
Has anyone told Zuckerberg he has zero credibility on protecting privacy?
3
Zuckerberg is nothing more than a typical millenial whiner, unable to accept responsibility for the mess he and company created.
3
Mark Zuckerberg is 33 years old and extremely lucky. He may have earned admiration for his determination to render an idea into the marketplace. Money and luck is not going offfer much in the way of deep insight into the ramifications of accumulating and then dispensing vast numbers of records of user activity via Facebook or any other social media network.
1
Gee, didn't anyone see The Social Network?
1
Ads are still not clearly marked on FB. Trolls and bots are still not clearly marked on FB. The solution to this is to stop waiting for them and our unstable government to act:
Use FB sparingly.
Turn off all trackers
Never use FB to log on to a website
Never take quizzes online
3
Zuckerberg is saying
In your face folks.
2
So some admitted socially inept nerd starts a site called Facebook and people are surprised by this?
1
Zuckerberg speaks. Finally. More empty platitudes from the man child.
2
Hate that tattoo you got in the Philippines? You can get it removed, painfully. What's written in stone on great, great, great grandpas tombstone is starting to fade. Your datum on the internet; indelible. Commenters seem to think that a stroke on their keyboard returns their privacy. Snicker.
1
A very good friend of mine won’t use supermarket bonus cards or get an ez-pass because “they will watch where I go and what I buy.” Forget about Facebook, he thought that was a stew of garbage. He is a big fan of George Orwell’s 1984. I used to think he was a paranoid conspiracy theorist, now maybe he was right and I was wrong. To quote The Firesign Theatre “Everything You Know Is Wrong.”
1
I thought using Facebook was voluntary. All these bleeding hearts now cry foul. How eager they were to accumulate a gazillion "friends", people they didn't know and put all the mundane activities of their life on public view, hoping to get a comment and a smiling whatever they call it. As far as Zuck is concerned, he should put away the Tee shirt and act like his role models, like Jobs, and how they would have responded under similar circumstances . They would have been on TV the next day explaining what went wrong and how it would be fixed. Maybe he was on Kauai, in his vast, secluded estate on the North Shore, where reality disappears into the jungle. Maybe he panicked watching the billions evaporate from his net worth. Maybe he realized he had created a beast he could not control. So man up Zuck, take the blow and get up and make it right.
Uh, "bahcom", it's people from all backgrounds and political beliefs crying foul. The outcry is not limited to your so-called "bleeding hearts". Blinders - off.
I stay in touch with family on Facebook. One can blog there privately and that is what I do. Anyone who just makes comments for all to see on Facebook is, in my opinion.foolish.
What gives anyone confidence that Zuckerberg and Facebook will regulate themselves -- thereby cutting their profits and stock valuation -- in the interests of preserving our democracy? They didn't do it following their consent decree with the FTC in 2011, and they won't do it now. In fact, self-regulation is directly opposed to their business model of selling user data -- your data -- to advertisers and anyone else who will pay for it.
1
disingenuous little jerk, Zuckerberg is. Always trying to come across as the well-intentioned humanitarian entrepreneur, and it's these sneaky third-party developers who are taking advantage of you. That worked the first time. Not the second, and the third, fourth, fifth.
2
You want privacy?
Stop using this junk.
5
Fool me once, shame on Zuckerberg; fool me twice, shame on me! I know how FB works for what I want out of it. And not for Candy Crush, silly quizzes, bla, bla, bla. Clean it up or I'm done. New platform was shared earlier, looks good. Minds.com
This is partially the fault of users sucked into a celebrity simulator. Don’t put it out there; can’t be used like this.
Easy.
We have heard the mea culpas all before. Check out this very informative link from MarketWatch.com, This article should be a primer for all users of Facebook.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-shocking-things-you-reveal-about-y...
1
We as citizens are not powerless.
We have the power to change the things in this country we dislike or abhor.
If you are concerned about your privacy— and you dislike how FB undermines democracy world-wide— and you understand that FB is the purveyor of FAKE NEWS globally— and you abhor that FB sells ads to Nazis—— lean away and unplug.
INSTEAD Support entrepreneurs who create new platforms that take privacy seriously. And are transparent. And care about healthy democracies. Click DELETE on those who don’t.
If you hate school shootings, vote for folks who support gun control legislation.
If you do not like the president’s policies, vote him out of office.
Vote for politicians who believe in the COMMON GOOD.
If you do not like certain companies’ behavior, take your dollars someplace else— to a company who IS a good corporate citizen.
Educate yourself so you don’t fall for fake news.
We have the power.....
1
Analytica + Facebook + Putin + Trump + Cruz + Mercer + Koch + Heritage Foundation + GOP + Ryan + McConnell
Connect the dots.
1
Mr Zuckerberg.... with all due respect, you knew about your problems with data harvesting YEARS ago. You created a monster and you are clueless about how to tame it. With all that money and profit at stake, you looked the other way. Tough to police yourself in any sort of meaningful way when billions of dollars of profits are at stake.
It is time for the govt to step in — due to you! Your negligence. Your inability to accept personal responsibility. Your compromised moral compass. Did you forget the buck stops with you? You are not some clueless college student. You are the CEO of a multi-billion dollar company. Grow up and start acting like it.
Yes, the users of FB were complicit in giving away their privacy. They are partially to blame. But you created this Frankenstein. Do something! Stop being complicit in disseminating fake news. Stop selling data to companies undermining democracies world-wide. Stop selling ads to the neo Nazis and alt right groups. Get your act together and stop acting like a lost little boy.
Start acting like the mensch your mother raised.....
3
There are three points in emphasis; 1) to asses the situations and fully investigate; 2) to make promptly technical resolutions in a view of the company-users relations; 3) to (re)build (moral-)trust.
Those consequential gravitates from #1 to #3 sway according to the degree of the reactions from investors and customers (users). #1 would not have been taken as important by the company, if there had not been arising criticisms. If a shift is aimed at, that may be a bit of rhetorical jump. The bar would be high. The moral trust cannot be a new product to sell.
In addition, that the company's executives were not aware of the problems over years, is very hard to take for me as a convincing excuse.
Now, in every local community, there are individuals and groups, thrived as social media business operators. They may call themselves as "neiborhood facilitators" or "coordinators". They try to coordinate today with Facebook's trust product. You will notice it if you pay attention.
Here is an example. Your mail has been missing or taken or stolen. There is another situation in which the social media communications lead to find some other persons' missing items.
If the situation is true, that's wonderful. It is fake, if the group promotes the benefit of social media in saying that the fault is on the one who do not send multiple digital messages to ask about the lost item.
With all the good intentions that launched Facebook, I was never sure why anyone wants, or needs, to share all sorts of personnel information on their profile. I was also left with why did the Facebook founders think that all this information should be shared. However, now the users, who were more than willing to provide this data, are shocked that it is being shared for a purpose they didn’t think about, but should have thought about.
Well, shame of Facebook if they really didn’t think of this dark side, and shame on the people who willingly provided their data without thinking about what could happen.
There is a lesson to be learned here, and it starts with the person in the mirror.
I'm not on Facebook. Never understood why so many people want to be famous. I just don't need it, for anything. The real problem is that your doctor, insurance providers, credit card companies, and banks, are all selling you out. And forget about the big credit reporting companies like Equifax.
1
I would appreciate it if you would inquire into whether the people who participated in the survey by Cambridge Analytica (or their Facebook friends) are also the people whose identities have been stolen for use in fake comments on government websites.
2
As long as these "social media" platforms are free, we will be the product. And I believe that is the fundamental flaw in users' understanding. We are not the customer but the product. We naively give our data (which obviously has value most don't understand), the raw material on which they're product is built. Why would the sellers of the product be interested in serving us?
FB is a giant vacuum cleaner of us which is packaged and sold to do exactly what we're complaining about now.
In the end Zuck can never fulfill his promise to protect our privacy when the platform is built to do the exact opposite.
6
I have never been a Facebook user, seeing little value in reading what my "friends" had for breakfast, photos of their pets or what they were up to that day. It always seemed like a colossal waste of time and a huge invasion of privacy. Now both have been proven to be correct.
4
Perhaps, but when those users were targeted they still had a choice. They could have vetted the information they were receiving. They could have sought multiple sources. They could have engaged in dialogue with those that had different opinions.
Instead, they lazily believed what was fed them.
We are still searching for excuses for a failure in civic discourse. Facebook enabled, but it was the American voters who failed America, not a digital platform.
So let me try to understand this. When Facebook helps Obama on a much larger scale, there is nothing to see here and let's even brag about it. But if Trump manages to use this data, it's the end of the world. Go it. Now let's continue to vilify Fox news as the only counterweight to the much larger mainstream news Orwellian propaganda machine.
3
For anyone who thought this is a "free" social platform - wake up - Facebook users are the product, we are by no means the consumer in this relationship.
1
The coverage of this story and Facebook's reaction seem to treat the sharing of information as a hack or a bug. This is not a bug. This is a feature. Facebook is a $40 million business and it's product is our information. The collect our information and offer it to advertisers, marketers, academics and creepy political consultancies. This is the business model. And it will not change unless and until we see Zuckerberg go to all is customers/partners and say, 'You know all that juicy data we've been providing? Well we're not revealing user data anymore.'
1
One day maybe we will grow up and away from this self centric, voyeuristic , waster of our time. And begin to reengage with our own lives, friends and family.
Lets please relegate everyone's photos back to their wallet, where at least physical space limited the amount of painful "look at me" time we had to pretend we were interested in. Meanwhile we have given FacePlant way way too much for way way too little in return. What we settle for in our lives is what we become
5
I want Facebook to get out of the news business. Targeting "fake news" to people by profile has caused so much harm.
And I want Congress to pass laws that protect our privacy by "opt in" requirements prominently stated at the top of each "terms of service". That line needs to be separate from "I agree to the terms of service".
2
This week was the last straw for me. I finally deleted my account. I had long regretted ever joining Facebook and knew that I was giving away information to advertisers. But I didn't consider the potential of the data to be used for political purposes, and even possibly for the spread of personally tailored, fake ads. Because these ads or posts can be micro-targeted down to as little as 20 people, I worry that the potential for spreading false information grows, because there isn't a "watchdog" media to see the ads and call them out as fake. Since they are only appearing on those few people's feeds, the false stories can essentially fly under the radar, which I find very frightening. I do remember seeing a few false posts on Facebook during the election, re-posted by family members who had no idea and became unwitting transmitters of these nefarious ads or stories. (One that comes to mind is that the pope endorsed Trump.) I know deleting my account won't help solve this thing, but I can no longer participate in a platform that I know to now be so dangerous. I encourage you all to #deletefacebook and keep in touch with friends and family through real phone calls and other means. It's time for us to rise up and wake up, before our democracy and sanity pays the price. #deletefacebook
5
Good for you, Mandy!
Never been on Facebook, don't have an account, and don't really feel like I'm missing much. There are just too many ways that personal data can get used and abused and being on Facebook is just an open invitation to all sorts of misery.
2
Surely laws were broken here. A "breach of trust" points directly to terms of service contracts, privacy laws and collusion with known illegal activity. My guess is Mr. Zuckerberg is less sorry about mistakes than he is desperately trying to avoid a wholly justified class action suit on behalf of his platform's users, or prison.
2
I'm a little tired of hearing Zuckerberg whine that when he created Facebook in his dorm room at Harvard in 2004, he never conceived that it would be used in this way. That is a child's answer. It's been a long time since then so enough already. When Facebook granted access to developers for fees, or worse, just gave access to academics for "research", it is an inescapable reality. How come no one has asked him why Facebook even allows dark posts (posts that disappear after a short time and cannot be traced to an originating source)?
4
Remember, he got seed money from Russia.
All Zuckerberg cares about is $$$$$$$.
One last thought, hostile governments used to spend huge amounts of resources to gather this amount of data. Now they get it on the cheap courtesy of a business model gone bad...
2
There needs to be one button in Facebook on top of the Settings Page that deletes the account and erases all data linked to account.
Hopefully after Elizabeth Warren rips into Zuck & tears him apart, she will demand that.
Anyone who worked in Marketing with data sets in the 90s were working on granular psychographics. None of this is new.
2
Instead of making it difficult and convoluted to opt out of sharing your data with apps, Facebook should make sharing of your data only an opt in choice and opt out by default.
4
I can't say the I feel sorry for all the FaceBook users out there who are now whining about how their privacy has been stolen. Didn't your parents ever teach you that there is no such thing as a free ride? Did you really believe that FaceBook was providing this platform out of a sense of charity and kindness? Corporations and yes even our own government are spying on us all the time. It is naive to think that we live in some sort of idyllic society. This is what Capitalism is all about. Stop whining and do something about changing it if you don't like it. Maybe start by supporting people like progressives Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren who put people over profits.
7
In the Facebook movie, "The Social Network," it shows Mark Zuckerberg and the other founders harvesting the photos of all the women who belong to Harvard sororities in order to play some kind of "who's hot" game. Then, while being punished for violating their privacy, he demands thanks for showing how weak their security was. I don't know how accurate the characterization was, but it seems that hacking is really at the core of network computing. Aren't cookies just another form of hacking, in a sense?
7
As I see it, these are the two most disturbing questions about the story: is Facebook naive or greedy; and what other entities acquired data from Facebook and what nefarious goals do they have? Mark Zuckerberg's apology is way too little, way to late.
2
Being on Facebook is like adopting a bear cub. Yeah, its cute in the beginning. But the grown bear will do what it wants without taking into account your needs or desires.
Maybe a better metaphor is Facebook is harvesting data from subscribers. As long as the subscribers are docile, all is good. If they get too agitated, the harvest can be affected. Put on some smooth music, a fresh coat of paint... the minions will settle down soon.
I have long assumed firms and situations like Cambridge Analytical are the norm and purpose for Facebook.
2
He wouldn't speak of compensating those who had their data sold. Someone needs to file a class action suit against Zuckerberg, FB, CA, Steve Bannon, Trump Campaign, etc, etc.
4
What Facebook is experiencing is bad kharma, something Zuckerberg should well understand well since he's apparently "cultivated an interest" in Buddhism. Facebook's very beginnings were no Noble Truth with questions still looming, at least in my mind, over whether Mark stole the idea from his classmates.
Zuckerberg lucked out when his app went viral, but that doesn't make him some genius or leader able to weather the complexities or speak coherently, let alone convincingly and honestly.
Perhaps it's time we retire Facebook and return to simpler times.
I think the Buddha would have approved.
5
Has anyone directly asked Zuck how it is possible to reconcile his basic business model where he sells advertising to best facilitate manipulation of purchasers by advertisers with the fact that an advertiser may have as their unstated objective the purchase of a social idea? It has been pointed out that in 2012 he made very similar promises to what he promises now - to no effect. The only progress is perhaps that he tacitly admits the necessity of regulation. But what use is that with a government where regulators answer to politicians who are essentially all for sale thanks to ridiculous election campaign laws?
1
Perfect time for someone to launch a new company that has the sharing pics/messages platform that users pay a few bucks a month for and does not carry advertisers and actually protects our privacy and is not in the data mining business. I would gladly pay for that if done by a reputable entity with integrity.
2
How can you be a data selling company and then claim to no protect personal data?
2
The other day I received an invitation to join a Facebook group for leadership board for a grassroots organization. I had to explain, once again, why I have never been on FB for ethical reasons, that I've always been aware FB does not exist to build community but to mine our data, that it is basically spyware, and I don't trust Mark Z. (Not to mention, it's like having to read everyone's Christmas newsletter all year long and I've never heard anyone say "Facebook makes me more happy.")
For once, this wasn't met as a completely countercultural, fringe stance.
12
My friends and family tried to get me to open an Facebook account and I told them no. Each time I would give they same reason. Your information is not secure. Imagine that!
6
The need to bolster privacy is an understatement, especially given that we have a President whose tweet this morning seems to boast about the edge Cambridge Analytica’s possibly criminal use of misappropriated data gave him.
4
Facebook's breach of trust occurred in 2012 when Facebook reps literally walked into Obama campaign HQ and said "we'll give you guys more access to our subscriber's data than folks usually get because we're on your side." This is chilling. It could also happen the other way so everyone should be alarmed. What if the Kochs bought all of Zuck's shares and then they owned Facebook?
3
Is anyone else getting tired of the dark side taking every gross disgusting unethical thing done by the tweeter in chief and frantically scrabbling around to find something... anything done by Obama that could possibly pass as a false equivalent? Just saying... it's getting really lame....
3
Mark Zuckerberg owes us an EASY way to delete ourselves from Facebook and all of the associated links.
5
I'm told by data experts that you can never check out of Hotel Zuckerberg. Those profiles CA got off that Russian extractor? CA sold those to numerous clients as yo heard mark say to CNN. No doubt the Russian gave them to Putin, as well, so good luck with that social disease you can't shake.
There is the personal responsibility issue here as well. Yes, Facebook was careless and damaged their users by exploiting their data. However, users through their brains on the roof in terms of assuming their data was secure. This is also on the users. It is different from the Equifax fiasco. In that case the person had no options if they wanted to buy a house or a car or anything that needed a credit check. Facebook is a platform that tells you that what you post belongs to them in many ways. You sign away your rights when you open an account. People can delete their accounts and pull up their big kid pants, or wait around for Facebook to fix itself, or wait longer for the government to fumble around trying to fix something that is really to big to really understand all of Facebook and others negative potential.
2
I wish I could count my billions (dollars that is, not users) and just 'pledge to do better'.
I pledge to end war, famine, and injustice of all kinds. Man, I feel better already!
5
A class action lawsuit that took away a large chunk of his money would be much more effective at creating change.
First, it is very complicated to delete your FB membership. Second, with the technology in the world, why cannot FB find out who the posters are and force them to identify themselves with actual names and locations.
2
Edward Snowden says that Facebook is "a surveillance company." Of course they are. I've never had a Facebook account. If you have one, now's the time to jettison it and spend more time with your real friends in meatspace.
In Germany, having learned the hard way, they have a privacy law that says all of your data and information belongs to you and that no one else can use it without your explicit written permission. Since going full Luddite probably isn't a realistic policy option, we need something like that here coupled with easy access to the Federal courts to press for confiscatory civil damages the first time Mr. Zuckerberg or his minions step out of line.
That ought to be enough to totally tank his stock price, and with it, one of the most egregious overreaches of the internet age.
5
After watching ABC news last night, I was surprised how Facebook's algorithms created extensive profiles on its users by gleaning information--even inferring political leanings and interests. They did the work for the political campaigns and sold access to their "product."
I don't blame Cambridge Analytica for harvesting the fruit of Facebook's squints. I blame Facebook for producing and monetizing it in the first place.
6
You are too kind. I certainly blame CA because they used FB data to screw with people's heads. Bannon, dark overlord, is spreading his mayhem in upcoming European elections.
2
I'm surprised that you are surprised. I'm surprised that anyone who has a FB account doesn't already know this. This is how they make money. Lots of money. Users give FB an incredible amount of very specific data about, pretty much, everything. That information is gold, thus Marks billions. Where else can marketers find such detailed information? I'm even more surprised that people just thought that FB is Free. Yeah, they operate their site out of the kindness of their heart. Cmon people, would you walk up to some stranger on the street and tell them everything you click and post on Facebook? That's what you are doing. Use it for what it's for. Say hi to auntie Martha or some college friend you haven't seen in three decades then turn it off. Don't "like" Walmart. Don't click on "trending". Those are nothing but data points to build a profile on you. I can't believe people needs this explained to them
2
I'm surprised by your response that you do not know how Facebook uses your connections and location. Facebook tracks you even when you are not active by tracking facial recognition. (They are not the only company to do so.) This is used to track your shopping habits and social habits through your friends and family that DO use Facebook. If you are on Facebook and do not "like" anything but do have friends, you are still giving them information. One way to get away from Facebook's direct tracking of your computer usage is to install software that blocks their cookies and weblink-tracks. I like the Norton Core, because it was pretty easy to install and I can protect all of the devices in my house: gaming systems, tvs, phones, etc. However, I am not so naïve as to think that I'm done with Facebook, Google, Amazon, and who knows what other companies tracking my online footprints and those of my family that are publicly sharing their info as well.
You would assume that somebody at Facebook approved these apps and quizzes. I'm also surprised that the EU did not go after Facebook years ago for allowing one person to decide to share the data of all their friends. That cannot have been legal considering the Data Protection Act protects personal data which includes your name.
1
I keep reading about Cambridge Analytica, Facebook and Russia's role in the election. Here are some things that don't add up to me:
CA gained access to files of 50 million FB users. Yet Clinton won the popular vote by 3 million votes, so there wasn't that much CA did to sway the voters. In fact, Trump won the by winning certain voting districts in key swing states by a total of around 150,000 which gave him the Electoral College.
In my opinion, how Trump received those votes in key districts is the real question, not this smokescreen of Cambridge Analytica.
1
I've always seen facebook as a heavily monitored data-mining trap -- being annoying aside. I'm glad I've avoided it.
7
There are some people that have every right to be upset but I find it funny that others that are upset by this are probably the very same people who openly share their Facebook posts to the public and "friend" someone who they just met for an hour.
6
The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars but in ourselves-W. Shakespeare
Over 2 billion people voluntarily post tidbits about their lives on a platform that covers the planet. When their personal info is mined for profit they are outraged.
Methinks the lady doth protest too much. Again, W. Shakespeare.
4
People were lied to. People who are admittedly naive about how the Internet works and how privacy as marketed doesn't work in our society. We are in for a rude shock as we learn that much as we hate to admit--though we may think of him as a traitor--much of what Edward Snowden warned about is true. Democracy is disappearing in America and that has a lot to do with the erosion of privacy.
5
One of the most disturbing aspects of FB data harvesting is that it has already been done. The horse is out of the barn. Zuckerberg's challenge is to protect FB users from that harvested data being used to further manipulate them - commercially, politically, socially, and divisively. Zuckerberg also needs to notify everyone whose info was harvested. Those users have a right to know their data is out there.
Will Zuckerberg have the maturity and guts to do the right thing by changing advertiser use of FB, guarding user data, notifying folks whose data was harvested, and living up to his original vision FB - the vision he sold to his users? I doubt it. It will then fall to his single commodity - FB users - to decide the fate of the company.
5
The business model of Facebook is built on profiling and selling user data - directly or indirectly. I'm guessing that Zuckerberg had more lofty goals for his project, but that's not what it is today. The company would not nearly be as big today without it, so I don't see any way to preserve the business model and make fundamental changes.
And I have to disappoint all the people that are congratulating themselves on having avoided Facebook all along. This is not a Facebook phenomenon. This happens everywhere, especially in the US where consumer protection is non-existent. It happens regardless of awareness or consent. With the spotlight that Facebook is under, it's probably one of the more harmless ones.
3
We need a new federal agency -- similar to the FCC or the FAA -- that regulates collectors and sellers of personal information.
It defies all logic that we tolerate -- in the name of the free market and free speech -- an unregulated industry that not only has the financial incentive to overturn our system of government, and to impose a new form of constitutional law that overrides all protections and constraints of the US Constitution.
5
I respect your opinion but strongly disagree!
The last thing that we need is another Federal Agency!
Unfortunately, State and Federal Agencies are like the Better Business Bureau - the don't actually do anything for the public!
Experience Credit Card Fraud? Banking issues are handled by the Secret Service (Google Secret Service Duties) - In the past 12 years, when was the last time you heard of them actually doing anything about the rampant CC fraud going on?
Whens the last time in the past 12 years that you heard of the FTC or FCC actually doing their jobs?
We don't need more laws or new agencies... we need actual enforcement!
1
The only reason you can take an airline flight, buy stock, use electric lights, or drive from one town to another is because of government regulation.
If we want to retain our constitution's assignment of voting to State regulation, we will need federal regulation to ensure that the State's vote in a presidential election cannot be overturned by a foreign country.
2
Given that FB is in the nebulous world of cyberspace, I’m unsure how effective one country’s regulation would be in the long run. Maybe a Geneva Convention-like protocol is needed.
Bottom line: The Internet is the real wild West. Caveat most definitely emptor.
1
Their business model was setup for this from the beginning.
I left Facebook shortly after I joined because I noticed an increase in email solicitations. I knew they were getting it from Facebook. I took myself down from active participation. But I see that I'm still on their doorstep in case I want to re-activate. That does not make me happy. I wanted to cut all ties to them and for my information to disappear forever.
4
I shut down my Facebook account about five years ago. Never looked back. For precisely this reason--my love for privacy.
It was truly liberating. I highly recommend it.
14
I hear on The Daily that Mr. Zuckerberg claims no one could have predicted personal data would be misused in this way. In fact, perhaps Mr. Zuckerberg had this failure of imagination, but any competent database expert could have predicted this sort of misuse. In fact, insofar as the folks at Facebook could not predict or imagine it, they are culpable and liable. The peril was built into the enterprise.
7
They promised some of the same things in the 2011 consent decree.
Their business model requires that they share data with apps.
As long as it is advertising based and they are a monopoly, their negligence will be a threat to our democracy.
12
Facebook is a convenient whipping dog with the real issue being that Congress has time and time again failed to intervene to protect the online privacy of Americans. Instead we are offered multi-page pop-up privacy agreements that, if read at all, inform you they'll be using your data with the alternative being that you can't access Verizon, Comcast, a car forum, you name it. Even the platform itself, a utility if there ever was one, has been sold off to industry captains who have divided up the geographic pie so that they are immune to competition wherever they operate. It's all stacked against you with FB now just another political wedge issue ..while the real issues go unattended.
7
The irony of it all. Zuckerberg, once the darling of the Liberals and FB once loved by Obama and the Democratic Party suffers a sudden fall from grace because it is suddenly accused of aiding abetting Trump's election.
Zuckerberg and FB merely shared the data voluntarily given to them in exchanged for free usage of the worlds most powerful social media platform. He is facing a powerful force in the Liberal political machine and may not possibly survive as well as Trump. There are no tears shed for Z and FB in this cold business world.
1
The Socialist billionaire is getting his dose from other Socialists.
Where is the popcorn...
2
I don't understand what the outcry is. If you're not paying for dinner, you're probably part of the meal, and no one coerced anyone to give Facebook an iota of information. It was all there in the terms of service. We're nonplussed now that it was revealed someone used that info for political reasons? How about we all grow up collectively and take responsibility for our own actions. If we want privacy, we're more than able to just stay private.
5
Perhaps in a few other countries, but in the US, there is nothing stopping this from happening. Yes, not revealing your inner most secrets helps, but not by much. The data machine rolls on with or without consent in this country.
The word "social" has become its own antonym. Nuts to Facebook, Twitter, and all the other antisocial media. I feel sorry for people who are addicted to these opioids of modern technology. I lead a very fulfilling life, thank you, using old-fashioned, truly social media: face-to-face, the telephone (speaking, not texting) and email ("good" technology). Oh, and "snail mail" for greeting cards.
4
Oh, Zucky, you and the Merry Zuckers at FAKEBOOK so disappoint us!
To think you do it all for the almighty buck, instead of out of the goodness of your heart...
(Don't know what's more ridiculous, that people thought FAKEBOOK wouldn't rat them out or that they didn't think you'd sell your soul and their data to the Russkies for money.)
And next time you have to allocute, try being more apologetic and sincere...hard as that may be for you.
2
If Hilary Clinton had won the election this article and these conversations would not be happening right now. Let that sink in next time you think about how biased and unfair the world is.
2
How do you know this? That seems like a pretty bold claim to make without a crystal ball.
1
When OBAMA does it, NYT calls him a POLITICAL GENIUS.
When TRUMP does it, NYT calls him a CRIMINAL.
Yes, SYNTHETIC "NEWS".
3
Well Mr. Zuckerberg said it best "then we don't deserve to serve you". After all that happened, the theft and misuse of personal data, the Russian trolling, and the subsequent election of Trump, followed by the absolutely milquetoast attempt at an apology by Mr. Zuckerberg, and then to learn that he would consider letting CA back on FB, or even sit down in the same room with these thieves, says that FB does not "deserve to serve you". It is time to abandon FB.
1
Get rid of Facebook. Send suckerberg to jail where he belongs.
2
Why does Z act like a college frat boy dufus everytime he is quoted when a stupid privacy breach like this takes place? Is this part of the business model?
2
There is nothing free on this planet!!
Except self love. It really doesn't cost anything.
Zuck -
Words are easy and cheap and do not revel beliefs like deeds; your words say one thing and your actions say another!
I, for one, am way past trusting you and your corporation!
Your name and corporation will soon be added to this Wickipedea list of businessmen labelled as robber barons
John Jacob Astor (real estate, fur) – New York
Andrew Carnegie (steel) – Pittsburgh and New York
William A. Clark (copper) – Butte, Montana[24]
Jay Cooke (finance) – Philadelphia
Charles Crocker (railroads) – California
Daniel Drew (finance) – New York
James Buchanan Duke (tobacco, electric power) – Durham, North Carolina
James Dunsmuir (coal, lumber) - Victoria, BC Canada[25]
Marshall Field (retail) – Chicago[26]
James Fisk (finance) – New York
Henry Morrison Flagler (Standard Oil, railroads) – New York and Florida[27]
Henry Clay Frick (steel) – Pittsburgh and New York
Jay Gould (railroads) – New York[29]
Edward Henry Harriman (railroads) – New York[30]
Lars Kovala (land speculator, railroads) – California, Wisconsin, Michigan
Andrew W. Mellon (finance, oil) – Pittsburgh
J. P. Morgan (finance, industrial consolidation) – New York
William Randolph Hearst (Media mogul) - California[33][34]
John D. Rockefeller (Standard Oil) – Cleveland, New York
Henry Huttleston Rogers (Standard Oil; copper), New York.[35]
Charles M. Schwab (steel) – Pittsburgh and New York
Leland Stanford (railroads) – California
Cornelius Vanderbilt (water transport, railroads) – New York[36]
etc.
2
“...We have a responsibility to protect your data,” Mr. Zuckerberg said...and if we can’t then we don’t deserve to serve you...
Sounds like soylent green coming off the dollar menu for a few months...
.............
“...Are there other Cambridge Analyticas out there...
Like Francis asking: "Am I Catholic or what"...
.............
"...Facebook representatives confirmed that Cambridge Analytica representatives met with Facebook on Tuesday...
Gotta hand it to them, they got in there talkin' to the big guy, even before the NRA could...
1
Perhaps it is me but, I don't recall stories about other companies that end with the NYT-- and last night's ABC News broadcast--including advice as to how consumers could "leave the subject company." For example, when the GM stories about ignition problems were published I don't recall the NYT advising GM owners how they could get rid of their GM vehicles. Could it be that Facebook is such a threat to the MSM that news organizations are hoping to increase their own ratings by helping people get out of FB and therefore return to MSM for their news and information? Just wondering.
I notice Mark Zuckerberg did nothing about this until Facebook’s stock price crashed.
Priorities...
4
Well, the NYT moderator didn't want to post my earlier comment that documented very real and serious issues with Facebook and how reported criminal activity is ignored!
Anyway, I am reading where people are deleting their Facebook account.
Deactivating a Facebook account is not the same thing as 'Deleting,' which Facebook makes very difficult.
It takes up to 90 days to delete your account...
https://www.facebook.com/help/delete_account
1
Zuckerberg is con artist of the first order.
4
When is the New York Times going to do the right thing and remove the Facebook button from these comments?
5
WHAT IS THE DEAL ABOUT SUBPOENAING THIS JERK TO TESTIFY BEFORE CONGRESS? Why is it "You need to come"? or "You should consider coming; you don't even need to put on a clean undershirt"? or "Thank you for sending your 4th v.p. but it would be nice if we heard from you"? AND WHY DOES THE ARROGANT JERK THINK ALL HE HAS TO DO IS SEND OUT A TWEET OR A "STATEMENT" WRITTEN BY A PAID STOOGE WHO REPORTS TO HIM? Not even a press conference for sabotaging a national election. Honestly I just don't get it. Follow the money, I guess.
3
I joined Facebook in 2009 and was on it for about six months. It prompted more nonsense "friend" requests and other gobbledygook that I deleted my profile. If Facebook fell off the Face (pun intended) of the Earth, I would neither notice nor care.
3
Here's an interesting observation.
When I logged in to my big bank credit card account a few months back, I noticed that one of the very first cookies that my browser loaded was from Facebook.
Which is kind of interesting since I've never had a Facebook account and never used Facebook in my life.
I tried the experiment again today. And there was no Facebook cookie in my cache. But there were two cookies from LinkedIn and one from Twitter.
(And make no mistake: I have never used either LinkedIn or Twitter.)
Can someone out there who is invested in defending the concept that Facebook and the other social media companies have an actual commitment to serving their users walk me through the logic of why this is happening to me?
3
I was criticized for years by relatives and friends for not using Facebook. Never did, never will. Why would any private citizen in a democracy knowingly and willingly place so much personal information in the public domain? And worse yet, then have the company profit from those data? Using Facebook information, even a novice sleuth can piece together a complete social, financial, and political profile of the specific individual. Facebook is the equivalent of living in a bugged glass house with your bank account statements and religious affiliation painted on your front door. If you want privacy, NEVER use social media like Facebook.
6
From the get-go I've always thought of "social media" and "antisocial media". My reasoning has to do with aspects like cyber-bullying; all the worst behaviors one can think of given an easy bullhorn. But the other aspect is how people simply relinquish any sense of privacy - it's very Orwellian as in 1984... Somewhere there's a vampire myth that states one must invite the vampire into one's home, the vampire can't enter uninvited...
1
If Facebook is serious about it's user's privacy then let them start with rewriting their Terms Of Service. I've stopped using Facebook because in the very first paragraph they claim rights to anything you post on your profile. Sorry but my content is my own. So, NYT why do you post on FB?
3
Even taking Facebook out of the picture, any privacy you think you have is an illusion and mistake on your part.
Disgraceful, simply disgraceful. But as an old friend used to say, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." Well.... Fool me thrice, it's "Hello, MySpace." Remember MySpace? I just checked, they seem to still be there. Or maybe go retro, with Ditto machine updates to be inserted with Christmas cards.
1
Did FB users actually think it didn't cost them a thing?
There is free cheese in every mousetrap.
9
Don't people willingly give their personal data to Facebook?
2
Listening to the Zuckerberg interview last night on CNN and then reading these articles, I am sorry there is no remorse for selling off our private data for profit. Get off of these platforms till they can prove to us that they are safe. In my simple mind that will never be safe so everyone should know that when they sign up or simply don't get used by these corporations. Pick up the phone and call your friends use the postal service but don't give away your private data.
I don't want Zuckerberg's sorry because it is meaningless
4
Analogies.....Facebook:Newspapers, FB:broadcast media, FB:telephone transmissions, FB:the US Mail (I’m sure there are more.) While FB is a social network, it’s also a COMMUNICATION and BROADCAST medium. It’s high time FB was held to the standards that accompany regulations and laws applicable to media and the US Mail. I’m a retired HS principal who was around when FB first came on the scene. It was ridiculous that school districts couldn’t compel FB to release the identity of threat sources or nude photo-mongers (even the police themselves couldn’t compel this info from FB.) If we have laws permitting wiretaps, why on Earth aren’t there laws requiring FB to regulate and cooperate with police and the US government? ESPECIALLY when something like our freedom and democracy are at stake?
5
Facebook ought to be closed down entirely, and sanctioned to the full extent of the law, in particular Mark Zuckerberg, the key perpetrator of this massive fraud.
3
Times up with irresponsible narcissist Marky Z, et al!
Facebook has demonstrated again, it requires serious governmental regulation AND the imposition of serious monetary fines/penalties, re its dysfunctional corporate behavior re the millions of invasion of privacy claims.
Just awful and disgraceful, so shameful and such endless $$$ greed.
Wake up America-- the threat comes from within.
4
Ridiculous. Facebook's entire business model is harvesting user data and selling it. Facebook has been working exactly as designed. The recent stories about Cambridge Analytica have simply made it more obvious than ever.
Facebook not only doesn't care about user privacy, it's entire reason for being is to harvest data from users. As effective as they've been at it, I wouldn't be a bit surprised if we eventually find out US intelligence services have had a hand in making the company a success from its inception.
161
The recently exposed depredations by Cambridge Analytica, aided and abetted by Facebook, are exactly the same thing as Admiral John Poindexter's Project Total Information Awareness circa 2013 and the work being done then and now by the National Security Agency. Remember the massive facility they built near Bluffdale, Utah a while back? What did you think they needed that for? It is a center for storing and integrating every bit of electronic data about everyone, everywhere, and then mining it for any purpose whatsoever.
Read James Bamford's books about the NSA and you will soon come to the conclusion that Mark Zuckerberg has headed the most successful domestic spying operation ever conducted within the United States.
Firing squads have never been popular in the United States, so I guess we'll have to rely on the market to render Facebook worthless as a lesson to those who would follow in Mr. Zuckerberg's footsteps.
Well said. What is it with people who post the most intimate details of their lives online and then are surprised that Facebook and other such parasitic predators harvest the information and make use of it for commercial purposes? Sadly, our addiction to social media is akin to a crack addict's addiction to the drug. Sure, social media has its good points, but it's also helping to shred the social and political fabric of our way of life. People walk around like zombies, cell phones in hand. It seems that the more "connected" we are, the less in touch with one another we really are.
1
There is no deep state. We have enough paranoid conspiracy theorists bouncing around. Chill.
Time to get special counsel to investigate this company, and specifically, Zuckerberg. I wouldn't be surprised to see him indicted soon.
3
I hope that there’s a class action sue against Facebook and Cambridge Analytica. Zuckerberg and Sandburg need to go.
4
The only thing a "Class Action Lawsuit" does, is make lawyers rich!
For example, the last Class Action Lawsuit that I was invited too involved the excessive oil consumption for our, and other owners, new Subaru's. It was settled out of court. The lawyers collected their exorbitant fees... and despite promises of extended warranties... nothing changed for the owners.
Class Action Lawsuits don't actually help the public!
Yes, class action lawsuits don't make anyone rich but the lawyers. But I disagree that they don't serve the public. In the US, lawsuits are the only effective means of regulation. Laws are usually toothless to begin with, but should there actually be any then the agency in charge will just be dismantled. The only thing that's keeping companies in check is the fear of litigation.
So if companies are so afraid of litigation, please explain how Facebook trembles when giving the data away?
This is a perfect example of why we need regulations. Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, Google, etc. have become public utilities as well as monopolies. In true Capitalist fashion the answer to nobody but the bottom line. They will sell our country for a profit when possible. We cannot count on them to self-regulate any more than any other big corporation.
2
FB is a giant tracking machine, like Google, but
GHOSTERY APP will let you know who is tracking you, usually about 10 trackers per internet click. Chose their private setting and not the anonymous aggregate setting. Turn off each tracker that pops up until all are "gone".
2
I am an agnostic with regard to Zuckerberg in terms of both his credibility and his expressed desire to “fix” this particular problem – the actual protection of personal data rather than just the optics of how poorly he and his company now appear. A larger issue is whether this Facebook incident will result in any public reevaluation of the entire “social media industry,” consisting of multiple companies, providing multiple apps, most of which fall broadly into the realm of “entertainment.” Is anyone’s personal data secure in any meaningful sense of the word? Personally, I have no idea, but I hope that people outside the industry with more technical expertise than I have are asking such questions.
It is fascinating to see Trump and his toadies, the ultimate science deniers, using data science to gain power. It is even more fascinating to see Facebook and Twitter, the essence of liberal and tolerant California, to become the tools for the ascent of autocracy.
If schools trained students in critical thinking, these would be topics of discussion in the classroom. Don`t expect this to happen, however. American Democracy is being dismantled, in part, because its populous is steeped in irrational passions. If Allan Bloom came back to life, he would find the American Mind shut close a lot tighter than he ever imagined.
4
We teach critical thinking every day. We teach questioning sources, smart online searches, and defending a position with evidence. We teach the difference between news and propaganda, and we do all this in the face of constant disrespect, such as you have just expressed.
1
One cannot trust Facebook - from personal experience I know and have not had anything to do with them for several years, after I discovered that Facebook was sending lists of websites I had visited to my friends. Think of the sites you have visited - do you want your closest friends to know? In my case it was pornography - legal but embarrassing.
Why should anyone be surprised? Zuckerberg has no scruples - just interested in the $$ his activities bring in.
I encourage everyone to think hard about continuing to use this invasive duplicitous enterprise.
3
Action speaks louder than words... FB knew about Cambridge Analytica's actions in 2015 and we're supposed to believe Zuckerberg.
2
They had much more data for the Obama campaign and nobody said a thing.
1
Deleted my account today. Greatly liberating!
5
Baby faced Mark will have to finally face the consequences. He put out a socal network product on day 1 with so many holes that sexual predators lured teenagers to their deaths without even parental permission and filters. Now users know they are being used. Microsoft and Apple work fast and try harder to put out a clean product. Mark never cared if his product insured privacy. No one in my family is on nor will ever be on facebook.
1
Don't worry Mark, those quitting will be back, now addicted they cannot stop.
If you were too stupid to know what FB was doing with all that free data you provide by believing people are really interested in you it's already too late.
If Zukerberg ever consents to answering for this in person (as opposed to publishing his publicist's comments), I hope he puts on a respectful suit and tie.
2
I don't believe him.
1
100 per cent certain that this data was shared with Putin's hackbots. Probably by Nix and Cambridge Analytica/ Bannon/Mercer. Herein lies the collusion connection methinks.
1
Russia did not hack the election. Facebook did not manipulate the election.
What many people seem to fail to realize is that the internet is nothing but a giant tabloid magazine, where anything can be written without fact checking and contributed without merit. Outrageous stories, crackpot theories, manipulated pictures.
Amassing hundreds (or thousands) of "friends" whom you don't know from Adam on Facebook is not going to result in perfect harmony. It is just common sense that a number of them are going to be malicious.
If the Russians or Zuckerberg had doctored voting results or posted messages with false addresses for the polls, I would say they interfered with the election. But claiming Hilary Clinton was running a teen sex ring outside a D.C. pizza parlor?
It was ignorant American voters who caused Trump to win. The finger points at them.
1
Facebook is a toxic entity. I do not participate, and have from the get go, and have encouraged my children to follow my advice to the almost evilness of this platform. In my view it is voyeurism, exhibitionism, for sale-ism tawdry behavior. People use the disgusting to spy on each other, period.
Facebook was complicit in the election of the worst President in history.
Boycott Facebook! No one cares what you had for dinner or your vacation photos.
4
I'm off Facebook.
3
Too little too late, Mark.
3
I am not using Facebook for a bit. Boycott!
1
Would the outrage be as fiery if Cambridge Analytica was supporting Clinton or Sanders?
And I should believe Zuckerberg ... why?
2
I tried Facebook for about 1 day. It constantly tried to manipulate me into buying ads to promote my art and actually would not let me post anything without buying an ad. Utter garbage. There must be a ghost of the page I never could complete floating around out there, generating useless noise, perhaps the perfect digital puppet for Analytica.
1
So does Equifax who gave away the credit info and social security numbers of everyone’s the country! How could Facebook not protect us?
What about our banks? Will they be saying “we didn’t see it coming we have to do better?” if we wake up one day and go to log in and they say they’ve been devastated by a hack and have no information on accounts. Hopefully not.
We never saw it coming with the huge credit bureau we didn’t select!
We never saw it coming with the fraudulent bank and Wall Street products based upon bad mortgages that they knew about and collapsed the market and banks. All the protections are gone under Trump and Mulvaney actions with the GOP.
We never saw it coming with the
Facebook betrayal! Zuckerberg knows he had data and how it could be used! Blinded by his success? Betrayed by his trusted leadership? We are suffering this crazy destructive decisive President!
Cambridge is likely guilty of crimes against America and Facebook people might know more than we know now.
Deregulation and tax cuts for the wealthy haven’t done jack!
Oh Bank of America (one of if not the most fined bank along with Wells Fargo) feels empowered to open 500 new branches.
We never saw any of this coming.
We are unprotected at home!
4
"When the service is free, the product is YOU !
1
Only a fool would take FB or any such at their word. All they care about is money, which they made through dirty means. There is no mea culpa that will be able to restore the damage that this dishonest bunch of crooks did to the country.
2
IMO Mark Zuckerberg is a naive youngster who lucked into his billions. He doesn't have the leadership intelligence or native talent to fix what he unleashed.
2
We should build a wall around Menlo Park!
1
Yes! A big, beautiful wall! And Facebook will pay for it!!
Why is anyone still on Facebook?
2
I live alone hundreds of miles away from old friends whose only contact is via Facebook. Unlike many, I limit my connections to a few actual friends and don't do games on FB. Without that contact, I'd be totally isolated. Lately, I've limited my sharing to just a tiny group, and will disconnect from shared sign on, but I can't disconnect from human contact. Those friends have families and thinking there will be regular phone contact instead is unrealistic.
3
We are in an age in which those with power do not readily accept responsibility for shortcoming for which they were responsible, even when holding oneself to account would be the wisest move. Cases in point: Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump (in spades!), Alex Rodriguez, George W. Bush, Dick Chaney (OMG!!), Donald Rumsfeld . . . and the list could go on and on. Get in line Mark. You fit right in with this group of 'successful' people who could not get out of their own way.
1
50 million people. That's a large European country. Or little less than the state of California. This is probably the largest theft of data in history. And by the political campaign of one US presidential candidate. They hired foreigners to do the dirty work. Exploring Facebook's "business model" of prostituting its 2 billion members to the global capital needs. How could possibly be ok for any third party app to be able to track data of all of our friends? Zuckerberg should explain this to us in sworn testimony to both US Congress and British parliament. He owes that to the world running the public square with 2 billion people. Almost half the adults on the planet are on Facebook. That became much bigger than his dorm dream. And with great power comes the great responsibility.
The Mercer family and Steve Bannon must testify before Congress, under oath, about their knowledge and involvement in the scheme.
People should make themselves heard by closing down their Facebook accounts. The world desn't 'need' Facebook. Nor Twitter for that matter.
2
Zuck's first attitude for his idea of FB was "Go fast and break things".
Then he and his biz buds recruited from Google (like Miss Sheryl of Lean In-Plan B infamy) surveyed the damage and decided "Done is Better than Perfect".
FB and its mgmt team has broken itself, and like millions of others I look forward to seeing them go down. If the owner of WhatsApp can recruit millions to drop FB, more power to him. Out of curiosity I started a profile on FB many years ago, but was never really attracted to it. A few days later, I deleted my acct, only to be harrassed in a depressing big bro way not to leave, b/c "my friends would miss me". But I hadn't "befriended" anyone, so that tells you that FB used a universal algorithm they automatically applied to everyone leaving, and that they really didn't know anything about that person, or care.
As Ben Greenzweig said, "if the product's free, you're the product". The "real world" is less convenient than FB, but has ONE really important attraction: you can control your destiny better. The malicious underside of it (Cambridge Analytica) won't be as bad, b/c they need a platform like FB to do their dirty work.
3
I just deactivated Facebook.
Buh-bye
1
He's made promises before
1
How I wish that I had a Facebook account. Then I could delete it in protest.
Google, Twitter, Snap Chat, et al, are you watching?
1
Way too little, way too late.
The disgraceful monstrously deceitful scam Facebook deserves to go down in flames, and Zuckerberg with it.
3
I thought this guy was supposed to be so smart.
2
Lose the t shirt.
2
Facebook us running around telling us that they are fixing their privacy problems, all the while trying to silence the whistleblower. How about we just call them:
Two-Facedbook.
So sick of seeing Zuckerberg's smug mug in a common-man's grey T-shirt with his chest sticking out below it. Contrite on the outside, uber-rich on the inside. But the fact remains that people were duped on his platform and they voted for an immoral sleazebag to quench their stoked hate. The fact remains that for almost half the voters, the sleazebag became, in their eyes, their only choice in a rigged election. Good people got duped because their human hunger for negative news was stronger than their will to use common sense. The psychology of it all is scary. Let's hope we wake up now and avoid reacting to everything the second we read it; run it through a logical thought process first.
What does he mean, he 'only' gives away (sells) my name, profile picture and my email? A few years ago he laid claim to all my photos, and only thru complaints by a few million of us did he relinquish that. This is all about money. How much did Cambridge Analytica pay him for what they got - a Trump win.
1
Time and again, greed.
Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation bought Myspace in 2005 for $580 Million. In 2006 Google signed a $900 Million deal to sell ads on Myspace; by 2007 it had 300 Million registered users and was being valued at $12 Billion. But the social network was subsequently crushed by Facebook, which launched a year after Myspace. On June 30, 2011, The Guardian reported: Myspace, once the world's hottest internet firm, has been sold to an online ad company for around $35m, a fraction of the $100m its parent company was seeking for the ailing social network and billions less than its value five years ago.
"So we cheated and we lied and we tested
And we never failed to fail it was the easiest thing to do
You will survive being bested
Somebody fine will come along make me forget about loving you
And the southern cross"
Songwriters: Michael Curtis / Richard Curtis / Stephen Stills
Why is there no customer service at Facebook?
Facebook has a responsibility?
Wow...you think?
What a novel concept...has anyone in American business history ever espoused such a position before?
1
FB caters to a narcissistic look at me culture that is so pervasive in the United States. Everyone has something to say, everyone needs be heard. Humility is seen as a weakness; hubris as a virtue. FB and our pathology go hand in hand its here to stay....I personally detest it.
4
On the bright side: the Zuckerberg 2020 Campaign is now DOA.
2