I had no illusions that people would actually do this en masse, but I wondered if even a slight migration of users might cause tremors. Users should always be able to knowingly agree to sharing "private" information.Įarlier this year, I suggested that concerned readers with the privilege to delete their Facebook accounts do so in response to the Cambridge Analytica scandal. The lack of options also traps Facebook users who rely on the social media platform to stay in touch with friends and family who live far away. You need a Facebook account in order to use Instagram, WhatsApp or even Tinder. Facebook's growth has become virtually inescapable. The social media company is a juggernaut in today’s business landscape, which is a more dangerous place for consumers thanks to decades of deregulation orthodoxy propagated by right-wing think tanks and elected officials. That Zuckerberg had the gall to misrepresent the truth - and to let his colleagues read our most intimate communications - speaks to Facebook’s unchecked power and scale. This is the angle Facebook will likely take when fighting a just-filed lawsuit from Washington, D.C.’s, attorney general, which alleges that the company misled users by allowing them to download Cambridge Analytica’s infamous data harvesting app without warning users about the implications. And even that might not be enough, given that Facebook has tried to defend itself by arguing that any user-generated content is fair game for disbursement to partners. The surest way to avoid this would be to opting out of Facebook’s private messaging system altogether, which kind of defeats its overall purpose. Not true, regardless of what legalese regarding user data-sharing is lurking within Facebook’s " Terms and Policies." We don’t get to “opt out” of sharing private messages with Zuck’s fellow tech titans. “But on Facebook, everything that you share you have control over.” “When organizations do surveillance, people don’t have control over that,” Zuckerberg told the Senate. Dean Heller (R-Nevada) asked the perspiring CEO if Facebook was “more responsible with millions of Americans’ personal data than the federal government would be,” Zuck not only said yes, but he also argued that Facebook takes this responsibility more seriously than the government ever could. Mark Zuckerberg lied to the Senate during his April testimony about Cambridge Analytica. And finally - the big one - Facebook gave Netflix and Spotify the ability to read our private messages. (Some companies said they used the data appropriately Netflix said it didn't access the messages.)īefore we go any further, let’s establish one thing. Facebook has been acting as an industry broker for access to allegedly private user information, according to the Times.Īmazon got permission to obtain our contact details from our Facebook friends, Yahoo got to view our friends' posts, and Microsoft got our lists of friends. But Tuesday, a bombshell New York Times investigative report took things to an entirely new level of scandal and outrage. When a company is caught engaging in as many unethical practices as Facebook has, it really takes something to shock people. (Andrew Harnik/AP) This article is more than 4 years old. A Delaware judge says he wants to hear from Zuckerberg before ruling on attorney fees in a shareholder suit challenging a proposed stock reclassification. In this April 11, 2018, file photo, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg testifies before a House Energy and Commerce hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington about the use of Facebook data to target American voters in the 2016 election and data privacy.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |