The Cambridge Analytica Con

The Cambridge Analytica Con

How media coverage misses the mark on the Trump data scam

The Baffler,

5 min read
5 take-aways
Audio & text

What's inside?

Think Cambridge Analytica broke new ground in betraying public trust? Then you haven’t been paying attention to the Internet for the last few decades.

auto-generated audio
auto-generated audio

Editorial Rating

8

Qualities

  • Controversial
  • Analytical
  • Applicable

Recommendation

When a whistleblower outed Cambridge Analytica for the inappropriate use of Facebook profile information for the purpose of influencing US elections, people around the world were understandably outraged. But, as author Yasha Levine explains in his analysis of the situation for The Baffler, this was a symptom of much deeper privacy concerns that involve the biggest tech companies in the world. getAbstract recommends this sprawling article to anyone interested in learning the truth behind personal privacy in the era of big data.

Take-Aways

  • The outrage over Cambridge Analytica’s use of Facebook profile information is understandable but misguided within the wider historical context.
  • Much bigger companies than Cambridge Analytica make similar use of users’ personal information and have been doing so for decades.
  • As far back as the 1950s, US government contracting firms were collecting and analyzing personal data to try and shape elections.
  • The Internet grew out of efforts by the US military to conduct Vietnam-era counterinsurgency programs at home and abroad.
  • Only by expanding the scope of their vigilance and oversight to include the biggest tech players can consumers and privacy advocates hope to make real headway in limiting personal data usage by companies and other entities.

Summary

When news broke that British election data firm Cambridge Analytica may have accessed millions of Facebook profiles and used that information to help shape the 2016 US presidential vote, pundits and consumers alike were predictably outraged. In an era of nearly daily massive data breaches and growing concerns around privacy in general, it is appropriate that media outlets shine a spotlight on companies that violate the public trust. In order to truly understand what happened with Cambridge Analytica and Facebook, that scrutiny needs to dig deeper than just two companies.

“What Cambridge Analytica is accused of doing, Facebook and Silicon Valley giants like Google do every day, indeed, every minute we’re logged on.”

As far back as the 1950s, US political institutions were using data to understand and control world events, especially as anticommunist sentiment grew. That’s the environment in which Ithiel de Sola Pool cut his analytics teeth and eventually founded a military contracting company called Simulmatics. That outfit would contribute to the development of ARPANET, an early version of the Internet that allowed military personnel to work with large datasets to make predictions about potential political uprisings. Pool devised a system to represent each potential voter as an aggregate of 480 data points, a model he used to help John F. Kennedy tailor his campaign messages in the 1960 presidential election.

“Now, of course, every election is a Facebook Election.”

While Pool and his company are long gone, the ideas they helped engender live on, and the maturation of the Internet has made it easier to collect the data that inform the various models being developed by Cambridge Analytica and others like them. After all, it was Facebook, and not Cambridge Analytica, that collected all those user profiles, and Facebook makes good use of the information to promote the stories and posts it deems most relevant or influential for each user.

“We are tracked and watched and profiled every minute of every day by countless companies – from giant platform monopolies like Facebook and Google to boutique data-driven election firms like i360 and Cambridge Analytica.”

Facebook isn’t alone, as other tech giants like Google and Amazon also have built their empires on the ability to understand their users at deeper levels. That knowledge only comes about through intense and constant data collection and analysis. Unfortunately, public outrage and oversight don’t reach nearly as deep.

 

About the Author

Yasha Levine is a former editor of The eXile, a Moscow newspaper, and is currently an investigative journalist for The Baffler and other websites.

This document is restricted to personal use only.

Did you like this summary?

Read the article

This summary has been shared with you by getAbstract.

We find, rate and summarize relevant knowledge to help people make better decisions in business and in their private lives.

For yourself

Discover your next favorite book with getAbstract.

See prices

For your company

Stay up-to-date with emerging trends in less time.

Learn more

Students

We're committed to helping #nextgenleaders.

See prices

Already a customer? Log in here.

Comment on this summary

More on this topic

Related Channels