Digital Content

Recently, a New Zealand man was looking through the data Facebook had collected from him in an archive he had pulled down from the social networking site. While scanning the information Facebook had stored about his contacts, Dylan McKay discovered something distressing: Facebook also had about two years' worth of phone call metadata from his Android phone, including names, phone numbers, and the length of each call made or received. Facebook uses phone-contact data as part of its friend recommendation algorithm.

The contemporary internet was built on a bargain: Show us who you really are and the digital world will be free to search or share. People detailed their interests and obsessions on Facebook and Google, generating a river of data that could be collected and harnessed for advertising. The companies became very rich. Users seemed happy. Privacy was deemed obsolete, like bloodletting and milkmen. Now, the consumer surveillance model underlying Facebook and Google’s free services is under siege from users, regulators and legislators on both sides of the Atlantic.

Alexander Tayler, the acting CEO of Cambridge Analytica, defended the firm saying, "As anyone who is familiar with our staff and work can testify, we in no way resemble the politically motivated and unethical company that some have sought to portray. Our staff are a talented, diverse and vibrant group of people." Tayler served as the company's chief data officer in 2015 when Facebook first raised concerns that Cambridge had gained access to the user data via British academic Aleksandr Kogan, in violation of the social network's terms of service.

The data on millions of Facebook users that a firm wrongfully swiped from the social network probably has spread to other groups, databases and the dark Web, experts said, making Facebook’s pledge to safeguard its users’ privacyhard to enforce. Paul-Olivier Dehaye, a privacy expert and co-founder of PersonalData.IO suspects the data has already proliferated far beyond Cambridge Analytica’s reach. “It is the whole nature of this ecosystem,” Dehaye said. “This data travels.

Opponents fear that the Stop Enabling Online Sex Trafficking Act messes with a key ground rule that has allowed the internet to flourish. “Section 230 we’ve been saying for a long time is responsible for creating the modern internet that we know and love—not to say that the current Internet doesn’t have problems,” says India McKinney of the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Former Federal Trade Commission consumer protection enforcers say Facebook's response to the Cambridge Analytica scandal won't be enough to keep federal investigators at bay. "Just because they make changes moving forward doesn’t mean they can’t be investigated or sued for what they did before," said Jessica Rich, who stepped down as the head of the FTC's Consumer Protection Bureau in 2017.

[Commentary] A storm dubbed #DeleteFacebook is brewing in techie communities, on Twitter and — irony alert — on Facebook. The idea is this time is different from all the other times the social network has violated our trust. There have been many calls to boycott Facebook for past indiscretions. If we want the result to be any different this time, we need to address the broader problem. Aside from a dramatic change of heart from founder Mark Zuckerberg, getting Facebook to reform what data it collects and how it uses it requires destabilizing its business.

[Press release] This was a breach of trust between Cambridge University Researcher Aleksandr Kogan, Cambridge Analytica, and Facebook. But it was also a breach of trust between Facebook and the people who share their data with us and expect us to protect it. We need to fix that. We already took the most important steps a few years ago in 2014 to prevent bad actors from accessing people's information in this way. But there's more we need to do and I'll outline those steps here:

Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), who chairs the House Communications Subcommittee, spoke at the American Cable Association Summit. She put in a plug for her network neutrality legislation, the Open Internet Preservation Act, and also suggested that proponents of network neutrality could be on the same page as she is and just not know it. Her bill prevents blocking and throttling, which she said "everybody agrees with." It does not prevent paid prioritization, which is where it runs into major pushback from Democrats.

[Commentary] Over and over in the last 20 years we’ve watched low-cost or free internet communications platforms spring from the good intentions or social curiosity of tech folk. We’ve watched as these platforms expanded in power and significance, selling their influence to advertisers. Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, Google—they grew so fast. One day they’re a lovable new way to see kid pix, next thing you know they’re reconfiguring democracy, governance, and business. This is an era of breaches and violations and stolen identities.