Edited By: Joy Jiang
This past week, Mark Zuckerberg has endured two days of questioning from Congress. Zuckerberg’s questioning occurs after there have been many reports about the problematic data practices by the social networking site, particularly with the Cambridge Analytica case.
The Cambridge Analytica Scandal
This scandal is one of the biggest in Facebook history. The personal data of up to 87 million users, primarily from the United States, was stolen by Cambridge Analytica, a British political consulting firm.
In the summer of 2014, Cambridge Analytica hired a Soviet-born American researcher, Aleksandr Kogan, to gather information about Facebook users. Kogan developed an app, called This Is Your Digital Life, which 300,000 users (most or all who were paid) used, and collected data from the users and their friends. This led them to the information of around 87 million individuals.
Since 2007, Facebook has allowed outside developers to build and offer their own applications, so technically, Kogan did not do anything ‘wrong.’ However, Facebook claims that Kogan lied to them by saying he was gathering the data for research purposes, but ultimately gave it to Cambridge Analytica. The company claims that they have deleted the data but recent reports suggest that the data still exists.
Cambridge Analytica has worked in support of the 2016 campaigns of Trump, Ted Cruz and Ben Carson – notably all Republicans. It is not clear whether the firm used Facebook data to better understand and ultimately target voters. Facebook never told the users who’s data was compromised after the company realized that Cambridge Analytica had the information. The data that the company had taken gave enough information to effectively persuade users to vote for a political candidate, and which sorts of ads would work best.
Facebook instead tried to force Cambridge Analytica to delete the information, however, copies still exist and the company used that data to target the Trump campaign.
The Zuckerberg Trial
Darrel West, during the Senate hearing said, “It disturbs me that some of my information may have helped Donald Trump become president, even if I was only one of 87 million.”
Throughout the 2 days, Zuckerberg faced almost 600 questions by 100 lawmakers. Although many of the questions that he faced included privacy and data breaches, some of Facebook’s users called out the network for how they profited from unpaid publishers. Organizations in Myanmar criticized Facebook for not doing enough to stop hate speech, which has ultimately incited violence in the country.
Many members of Congress argued that Facebook was not taking off harmful content, such as fake profiles or recruitment for terrorist activities, fast enough. Others argued that there is a problem with censorship. For example, Missouri Republican Billy Long showed pictures of two women. Long questioned, “Who are they?”, to which Zuckerberg replied “I believe … is that Diamond and Silk?”
Diamond and Silk recently received a message that said their Facebook Page’s reach was being moderated because their content was considered “unsafe to the community.”
Long then says, “What is unsafe about two black women supporting President Donald J. Trump?” This was the basis of Republican questioning – they wanted to know about the censorship of conservatives. Members of Facebook’s Trending Topics moderation team admitted that the company was not featuring news from conservative outlets the same way that they featured mainstream or liberal outlets.
Democratic Senator Richard Durbin of Illinois asked Zuckerberg if he would be comfortable telling everyone which hotel he was staying at, or if he would be comfortable with telling everyone the names of everyone he messaged this week. Zuckerberg responds, “No. I would probably not choose to do that publicly here.”
Durbin then says, “I think that may be what this is all about. Your right to privacy. The limits of your right to privacy. And how much you give away in modern America in the name of, quote, connecting people around the world.”
The right to privacy was compromised as a result of the Cambridge Analytica scandal. Many users feel betrayed by the social media network as a result of the scandal. At an age in which election results can be determined by social networks and the data that they have, it is very important to regulate who has access to this data.
What should be done?
The Zuckerberg trial makes several things evident. Firstly, in an increasingly digital age, it is fundamental that there are stricter regulations for social networks in relation to privacy. Moreover, social networking sites should tell people when their data has potentially been leaked (i.e. with the Cambridge Analytica scandal). Mistakes do happen – but it is important for companies to be held accountable for their actions. Even after Zuckerberg knew that Cambridge Analytica had the data from up to 87 million users, he did not ban Cambridge Analytica ads, which during the trial admitted was a mistake on his part.
It is also important for platforms such as Facebook to be fully neutral, which is important to omit bias on issues. This relates to the case of Diamond and Silk. Zuckerberg says he wants to develop artificial intelligence to weed out hate speech or terrorist activity and ultimately regulate Facebook. However – he fails to mention that AI is created by humans – who have their own biases. Facebook should have more in terms of regulations with hate speech and the regulation of these instances, and AI may not be the answer.
With all this being said, through watching the questioning, it is clear that many of the senators are not aware of how technology works. For example, Senator Orrin Hatch asks Zuckerberg how he is supposed to sustain a business model in which users are not paying. Zuckerberg smirks and says, “Senator… we run ads.” With all of this, it is clear that when questioning technological corporations, it is important to have people who are in tune with how the internet and technology works. This will lead to better accountability and will force the leaders of these big corporations to answer the core questions in the complicated issue that is internet privacy.
For those curious for more information, here are two videos that might be interesting to watch in relation to the Zuckerberg case: