Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
First of all there are democrats on this thread pretending to be outraged by the mere fact of taking online data to target individual voters. But they never said a thing when Obama did it.
However, yes. Obama did use personal data to send to individuals a narrative of Mitt Romney.
Why wasn't this a serious issue in 2012?
This hypocrisy of it being okay when my guy does it and bloody murder when the other guy does it is destroying the country.
That statement is just wrong---prime example of deflection and straw argument--
It has been pointed out numerous times on this thread w/links to articles supporting the idea that Obama's internet data collection used open, informed, requested sharing of personal info/opinions...
They didn't go behind people's backs and get it by misrepresenting what the info was being used for
They didn't pretend to be various fake people and organizations and present false "news" articles and personal posts from Russian trolls posing as Americans to sway people's opinions and heighten their fears and prejudices
They used data that people gave them to design strategies to capture people's attention, get their interest, and hopefully their vote
It is the difference between ordering what you are told is a grass-fed beef hamburger with X% of fat and getting exactly that...
and ordering what you are told is a grass-fed beef hamburger with X% of fat and getting something that is definitely NOT what was advertised...and you are not able to tell the difference...
If you want to discuss unethical data mining used in propaganda techniques to sway voters' opinions and choices at least compare apples to apples...
First of all there are democrats on this thread pretending to be outraged by the mere fact of taking online data to target individual voters. But they never said a thing when Obama did it.
However, yes. Obama did use personal data to send to individuals a narrative of Mitt Romney.
Why wasn't this a serious issue in 2012?
This hypocrisy of it being okay when my guy does it and bloody murder when the other guy does it is destroying the country.
First of all, there are conservatives who on this thread who are falsely stating what democrats are outraged about.
So I am going to state the problem again.
1. A researcher approached Facebook and asked for permission to conduct a project on Facebook.
2. Since it was for academic purposes, Facebook agreed.
3. The researcher then solicited for participants in his project.
4. 270,000 Facebook users agreed to participate in a research project for academic purposes.
5. The researcher then took their data, AND the data of 50 million additional users who had not agreed to participate. This violated the researcher's agreement with Facebook.
6. The researcher then sold ALL the data to Cambridge Analytical. Again, a violation of the researcher's agreement with Facebook.
7. Cambridge Analytical used the data for political purposes.
As a liberal, I feel that the researcher is at fault for basically committing fraud. I think Facebook is at fault for not keeping user data safe and confidential. And I think Cambridge Analytical is at fault because they knew that they were using what was essentially stolen data, and when Facebook found out that Cambridge Analytical had the data, Facebook told them to destroy the data. Cambridge Analytical said they did so, but they were lying. That's unethical in every possible way.
That's what I'm outraged about.
As for Obama doing the same thing, no. It was not the same thing. Obama set up a Facebook page for his campaign. People who visited the page KNEW it was political. People who signed up KNEW their data would be used for political purposes. People had options when they signed up about sharing their data, and sharing their friends' info. While I'm not thrilled with this, the differences should be obvious to any thinking adult.
First of all, there are conservatives who on this thread who are falsely stating what democrats are outraged about.
So I am going to state the problem again.
1. A researcher approached Facebook and asked for permission to conduct a project on Facebook.
2. Since it was for academic purposes, Facebook agreed.
3. The researcher then solicited for participants in his project.
4. 270,000 Facebook users agreed to participate in a research project for academic purposes.
5. The researcher then took their data, AND the data of 50 million additional users who had not agreed to participate. This violated the researcher's agreement with Facebook.
6. The researcher then sold ALL the data to Cambridge Analytical. Again, a violation of the researcher's agreement with Facebook.
7. Cambridge Analytical used the data for political purposes.
As a liberal, I feel that the researcher is at fault for basically committing fraud. I think Facebook is at fault for not keeping user data safe and confidential. And I think Cambridge Analytical is at fault because they knew that they were using what was essentially stolen data, and when Facebook found out that Cambridge Analytical had the data, Facebook told them to destroy the data. Cambridge Analytical said they did so, but they were lying. That's unethical in every possible way.
That's what I'm outraged about.
As for Obama doing the same thing, no. It was not the same thing. Obama set up a Facebook page for his campaign. People who visited the page KNEW it was political. People who signed up KNEW their data would be used for political purposes. People had options when they signed up about sharing their data, and sharing their friends' info. While I'm not thrilled with this, the differences should be obvious to any thinking adult.
Plus that same "researcher" was at that time teaching at a Russian university---a class on using data for people online for political propaganda strategies
And that same researcher apparently is working for FB now...
How FB can employ someone it KNOWS committed not just illegal acts against consumers but illegal acts against FACEBOOK seems to me to mean that FB knew what was going on and decided there was a way to make money for Facebook using either the illegal/unknown harvesting of personal info and/or selling it...
And don't forget that Facebook was sanctioned for illegal activity done in 2014 or 15 and is set to pay a fine for EACH instance of future violation of the same offense...
Even a company as rich as FB is going to be in serious caca after all those members were taken advantage f
That statement is just wrong---prime example of deflection and straw argument--
It has been pointed out numerous times on this thread w/links to articles supporting the idea that Obama's internet data collection used open, informed, requested sharing of personal info/opinions...
They didn't go behind people's backs and get it by misrepresenting what the info was being used for
They didn't pretend to be various fake people and organizations and present false "news" articles and personal posts from Russian trolls posing as Americans to sway people's opinions and heighten their fears and prejudices
They used data that people gave them to design strategies to capture people's attention, get their interest, and hopefully their vote
It is the difference between ordering what you are told is a grass-fed beef hamburger with X% of fat and getting exactly that...
and ordering what you are told is a grass-fed beef hamburger with X% of fat and getting something that is definitely NOT what was advertised...and you are not able to tell the difference...
If you want to discuss unethical data mining used in propaganda techniques to sway voters' opinions and choices at least compare apples to apples...
So, are you saying this election was not legitimate?
First of all, there are conservatives who on this thread who are falsely stating what democrats are outraged about.
So I am going to state the problem again.
1. A researcher approached Facebook and asked for permission to conduct a project on Facebook.
2. Since it was for academic purposes, Facebook agreed.
3. The researcher then solicited for participants in his project.
4. 270,000 Facebook users agreed to participate in a research project for academic purposes.
5. The researcher then took their data, AND the data of 50 million additional users who had not agreed to participate. This violated the researcher's agreement with Facebook.
6. The researcher then sold ALL the data to Cambridge Analytical. Again, a violation of the researcher's agreement with Facebook.
7. Cambridge Analytical used the data for political purposes.
As a liberal, I feel that the researcher is at fault for basically committing fraud. I think Facebook is at fault for not keeping user data safe and confidential. And I think Cambridge Analytical is at fault because they knew that they were using what was essentially stolen data, and when Facebook found out that Cambridge Analytical had the data, Facebook told them to destroy the data. Cambridge Analytical said they did so, but they were lying. That's unethical in every possible way.
That's what I'm outraged about.
As for Obama doing the same thing, no. It was not the same thing. Obama set up a Facebook page for his campaign. People who visited the page KNEW it was political. People who signed up KNEW their data would be used for political purposes. People had options when they signed up about sharing their data, and sharing their friends' info. While I'm not thrilled with this, the differences should be obvious to any thinking adult.
Again, you people keep missing the point. Their friends didn’t ask for their information to be used, but the Obama campaign used it anyway. It’s the same frickin thing!!!
Again, you people keep missing the point. Their friends didn’t ask for their information to be used, but the Obama campaign used it anyway. It’s the same frickin thing!!!
It's not the same frickin' thing. One involved fraud. The other didn't.
MSM message---if Obama did it then it's just fine, if Trump did it then it's cause for impeachment. So tired of the double standard. When will people wise up?
MSM message---if Obama did it then it's just fine, if Trump did it then it's cause for impeachment. So tired of the double standard. When will people wise up?
In case you haven't been following along, this is one of many on a list of what Trump has done that should get him impeached.
I use social media to share my views, as do others. I doubt these outside influences have much of an effect. People make up their own minds.[/QUOTE]
EXACTLY. It's very insulting to think that so many are so willing to be bamboozled. Since I was a fourth grader, a very long time ago, my father drilled into me that saying by Poe: believe half of what you see and nothing that you hear.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
