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
We do know... intermediary's posted policy for data was at odds with Facebook's policy but we also know Facebook had very little enforcement except against competitive threats and commercial opportunities (see antitrust lawsuits and evidence). Plus again he says he told them. /4
We do know...his "equal partner" was hired by Facebook in Oct '15 and he also told them what they had done according to testimony. So suspiciously while Facebook used one partner as a scapegoat and called the activities fraudulently they kept paying the other partner as a FTE. /5
We do know... Facebook and Zuckerberg himself misled reporters and Congress on the case including the timing and completion of what Facebook called "legal certification" with Cambridge Analytica to protect their users. As a lawyer, Daphne would be horrified by the agreement. /6
We do know... Facebook negotiated so Sheryl Sandberg wouldn’t have to answer questions about the Cambridge Analytica matter in the only time we know that she testified to Congress and under oath. She has completely avoided scrutiny. /7
We do know... there were many other "Cambridge Analyticas" and the AG of Massachusetts has an active lawsuit regarding the audit of the entire app ecosystem and its design, data policy, $, enforcement priorities are also part of the FTC's antitrust case to break up facebook. /8
We do know... US authorities were never able to get their hands on CA's servers or data and FEC just unsealed last week its attempts which ran until months ago. We also know from UK regulator FB never even followed up to investigate despite MZ testifying to Senate they would. /9
We do know... UK news channel 4 produced a really good documentary with new evidence using the actual breached data in Sep 2020. It was mostly missed by US press, along with a lot of the above details, as the narrative on CA was written off as too confusing or misunderstood. /10
We do know... Facebook's influencers flipped out over that word "breach" by the way which you probably know better than us has a very specific legal definition in California which Facebook wanted to make clear didn't believe obligated them to inform their users. /11
We do know... AG Racine in DC has a very active 2018 lawsuit now in discovery on all things Cambridge Analytica - and recently named Mark Zuckerberg. Pushing for discovery and depositions of FB key leadership. Facebook's motion is due Wed 11/24. /12
Where we have smoke... Facebook paid $5.1 billion to settle with SEC/FTC and avoid depositions and discovery of leadership. Again, second largest pension fund in US has active lawsuit now including insider trading charges about the cover-up on the matter. /13
Where we have smoke...evidence in same lawsuit is Facebook terminated PWC's audit of Cambridge Analytica before completion - and this parallels UK regulator statements. Despite MZ testifying FB needed to investigate to get answers FB chose not to investigate to get answers. /14
Where there is smoke...Mark Zuckerberg very awkwardly stumbled or did a deer-in-headlights during testimony when he was thrown curve balls about Cambridge Analytica cover-up under oath in two separate hearings. There are clear dodges in answers that beg above investigations. /15
Where there is smoke...CA's Alexander Nix and Trump's Brad Parscale both falsely testified to House Intel about campaign tactics and CA's role. Parscale had a meltdown involving swat team when evidence came out Sept 2020 which was at odds with his version of events. /16
There is a lot more here. But if you're going to ask for the definitive record, my answer is we don't know. We clearly know a number of key facts which aren't widely understood. We also have endless smoke which anyone wanting to get to facts would see as problematic. /17
If anyone needs footnotes for anything above, happy to provide but will save length of thread. Everything can be backed up by testimony, evidence or when reported is clearly labeled and from high-cred newsrooms. Also, some of this in this thread.🤷🏽‍♂️/eof

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Jason Kint

Jason Kint Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @jason_kint

19 Nov
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
Read 11 tweets
19 Nov
Three hours.
Also three hours: The Wolf of Wall Street
3:01 Dances with Wolves
3:02 The Deer Hunter
3:05 King Kong
3:08 Magnolia
(thanks to @RepDonBeyer for the inspiration)
Read 6 tweets
18 Nov
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
Read 19 tweets
18 Nov
"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
Read 7 tweets
18 Nov
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
Read 19 tweets
15 Nov
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
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(