"They are very good at dancing with data." - Facebook whistleblower. We've discussed this regarding Zuckerberg's misleading testimony on hate speech. But this Markup report is super important to understand prevalence of news brands. Stay with me here. /1 themarkup.org/citizen-browse…
When Facebook finally, under public and government pressure, began releasing a quarterly content report (first in q2 after reportedly suppressing q1), it's used a metric simply showing the # of users who saw links to a website without analyzing frequency of those sites. /2
any researcher with access to source data would avoid this pretty terrible metric. Since The Markup has developed its own source data from users volunteering their aggregated data for research, they are able to use a much better metric - taking into account frequency. /3
For those in the media business, what Facebook did was the equivalent of forcing an advertiser to only know the number of users (aka "reach") who saw their ad without letting them know the number of times they saw it (aka "frequency"). Put another way... /4
...if you were buying ads,
A) one million people saw your ad campaign one time
-or-
B) 800,000 people saw your ad campaign 100 times
These two things aren't remotely the same in terms of impact and any media researcher worth a high school degree understands this. /5
and a wonky point for those dialed in on the @FTC antitrust lawsuit to break up Facebook, the presentation of these data points showing users as relevant analysis undermines Facebook's argument in the lawsuit that user metrics don't measure intensity. /eof
For those who track monopoly power and privacy rights, incredibly smart hearing this morning in Brussels where they have an opportunity to tame surveillance advertising which will only work if they also constrain “gatekeepers” - also on the eve of legislation in next 60 days. /1
I’m especially energized when I see testimony from people I don’t know who absolutely nail the issues. “The most important thing you can do is strongly limit the data that the dominant players have access to.” Thank you. Nailed it and rationale. /2
Important: adtech lobby (IAB, CCIA, Google, Facebook) have used influence and ad campaigns to create a straw man this is a “ban on targeted ads.” This is entirely false. The concern is tracking - aka surveillance - now also limited by Apple iOS. All four witnesses noted this. /3
Aah, Stanford researcher with a timely prompt. I'm going to have to do this, aren't I? The only right answer here is that we don't know. the entire case was a gigantic cover-up. There are very active lawsuits from major pension funds and powerful AGs to get answers. /1
Yes, many will reply to her that their methodology and targeting was "snake oil" but that’s still very much debated on use and impact but it's also irrelevant to the real issues at hand. /2
We do know... Cambridge Analytica contracted with a purpose-built intermediary that laundered and sold Facebook data to them. We also know the intermediary's CEO testified under oath he told facebook what he was doing in Sep '15, months prior to the first Dec '15 press report. /3
Aah, Google->Stanford academic. I'm going to have to do this, aren't I? The only right answer here is that we don't know. The entire case was a gigantic cover-up, dust hasn't settled. There are VERY ACTIVE lawsuits from major pension funds and powerful AGs to get answers. /1
Yes, many will reply to her with FB's PR spin that their methodology and targeting was "snake oil" but that’s still very much debated/confused on the actual data use and relative goals and impact but it's also irrelevant to the real issues at hand. Here is what we DO know. /2
We do know... Cambridge Analytica contracted with a purpose-built intermediary that laundered and sold Facebook data to them. We also know the intermediary's CEO testified under oath he told facebook what he was doing in Sep '15, months prior to the first Dec '15 press report. /3
Looks like the Federal Trade Commission's opposition to Facebook's attempt to dismiss their case to break the company into bits for anticompetitive behavior was just filed. Night reading...
this summary of amended complaint's metrics to establish market power is a reminder how absurdly Facebook's lobby tried to argue FTC hadn't backed up their monopoly claim. Having been around a few digital media businesses for 25+yrs, these are valid metrics to move forward. /2
oh, and there's that not-so-minor point, too. the competition used the same metrics. /3
WTF. I deleted my Facebook account on Oct 3rd, 2021 after watching Facebook whistleblower on 60 Minutes. ***But Facebook just deceptively brought it back from the dead.***
Dear Facebook, I look forward to you trying to explain this one (cc @nickclegg). Evidence thread. 1/6
Yes, I noted 30 day period in which Facebook hinted my account would return if I logged in (accident or intentional). So I was super careful to not log in.
Today at 1:53pm, I received this email from Facebook claiming to notice I was "having trouble logging into my account." 2/6
This was disturbing. Since my account was clearly communicated to be deleted and Facebook assured me that it was (as long as I didn't log in for 30 days), Facebook shouldn't even have my email in order to notify me if someone tries to log into my Facebook account. We're over. 3/6