@CommonsCMS hearing today on Fake news.
“Zuckerberg sent his cap” suggested the Belgian representative, a phrase the Belgians use when to describe a guest not turning up.
This, despite at least 10 different countries being represented on the committee, is quite a discourtesy.
“Zuckerberg sent his cap” suggested the Belgian representative, a phrase the Belgians use when to describe a guest not turning up.
This, despite at least 10 different countries being represented on the committee, is quite a discourtesy.
2/. I want to replay the hearing again, before doing a thread, but an issue that arose in recent weeks again was playing through my mind as I listened to one country after another talking about hijacking social media to subvert election.
3/. How do we control the influence of foreign actors delivering messages in social and other media through U.K. Companies?
Companies, indeed, that a political party might use to do its dirty work-creating “arms length” deniability?
Countries that do NOT have U.K. interests 1st
Companies, indeed, that a political party might use to do its dirty work-creating “arms length” deniability?
Countries that do NOT have U.K. interests 1st
4/. There have been an increasing number of threads about the true source of money supporting U.K. registered organisations such as Taxpayers Alliance (funded at least in part through the American Friends of TPA), or IEA (caught lobbying for foreign funds) ASI etc.
5/. One such company recently in the news was the U.K. Policy Group Ltd
Sounds very British doesn’t it?
But it’s Directors are US Republican lobbyists (America Rising). (Also behind Definers that ran the black smear campaign of Soros to try and deflect attention from Facebook)
Sounds very British doesn’t it?
But it’s Directors are US Republican lobbyists (America Rising). (Also behind Definers that ran the black smear campaign of Soros to try and deflect attention from Facebook)
6/. Their (UKPG Ltd) sole client, as far as the Observer was able to identify, was the Conservative Party.
Now, why would that be?
Now, why would that be?
7/ were an organisation like that to run ads, or to plant messages in social and other media, a check by Facebook would come back as a British Company, UK registered. Not obviously a political organisation when one looks at their website.
How is this to be policed?
How is this to be policed?
8/. You will see from the Observer story about U.K. Policy Group Ltd, that when they phoned the office last week to speak to the company the administrator said they had left the previous week. “I don’t know where they have gone”.
theguardian.com/politics/2018/…
theguardian.com/politics/2018/…
“Itsl (Tweet 5).
Why does it autoincorrect to put in an apostrophe.
And why, despite me knowing it does, do I not notice until too damn late?
Why does it autoincorrect to put in an apostrophe.
And why, despite me knowing it does, do I not notice until too damn late?
Here we have the Chief Technology Officer for the US Federal Trade Commission giving evidence about their findings way back in 2011. Facebook DID allow access not just to your data but to your friends data and not in the controlled way suggested by Sir Richard Allen this morning
So what did Sir Richard Allen know, what SHOULD he have known and what did Zuckerberg compartmentalise so adverse information was NOT disseminated?
That is why Zuckerberg should have been there to answer questions.
That is why Zuckerberg should have been there to answer questions.
