4 ms·

Let's be realistic here. This headline is nothing but partisanship. The only reason this is exaggerated as a "data breech" is because of the connection to the T

Let's be realistic here. This headline is nothing but partisanship. The only reason this is exaggerated as a "data breech" is because of the connection to the Trump campaign. The real scandal is that such data is so easily harvested and freely available. I'd be interested in seeing how much of facebook's data repository was used in targeted political ads by all parties. Including Russian agitators who have been shown playing both sides.

forapurpose 9y ago
It's essential to hold the President publicly accountable for his actions, especially when illicit actions pervert the foundation of the United States, the democratic process. That's not partisan; that's normal, healthy democracy; that's the primary public good provided by journalism.
- allthenews 9y ago
  Sure. But it is unethical to exaggerate and hold only part of the political system accountable for shady or illegal practices. This is part of a consistent pattern. Our media has become as hopelessly partisan as our unfortunate two party system, and unethical behavior on one front does not justify the same on another in response.
  - Thorncorona 9y ago
    Can you explain why it's unethical to hold people accountable for their actions or actions others took on their behalf?
    - allthenews 9y ago
      From my post, again: >But it is unethical to exaggerate and hold only part of the political system accountable Please consider what I wrote in sum. Partisanship and exaggeration are antithetical to trust.
      - Thorncorona 9y ago
        Don't think the intent of my question was communicated clearly. Let's try again. From your original post: > The only reason this is exaggerated as a "data breech" is because of the connection to the Trump campaign. You have provided no evidence of this, and until you do, your comment is read as a case of whataboutism[0]. Because we are not shoehorned into the pursuit of a unilateral solution, we can both [A] call out Trump's unethical engagement of Cambridge Analytica (CA) and [B] lobby for more stringent privacy regulations, like the EU is doing. Given the, as a prior commenter said, 25 scandals, along with string of accusations of indecent conduct, collusion, etc. that Trump is clouded with, the conclusion being made is that his engagement is not the unknowing of an unethical actor acting on his behalf, rather the turning of a blind eye. So given the inflammatory nature of the original comment: > Let's be realistic here. This headline is nothing but partisanship. So in sum, on first glance your comment leads me to assume you have an agenda. Assuming that this isn't true, lets talk about main issue here: the micro targeting of ads, and the usage of this "data breach" in the Trump campaign. Frankly, this scares me. The power this data provides and the way that it can be wielded should scare people - who wants to live in a world where the government/corporations/people can induce people into certain behaviors? Whether Trump or Clinton uses this information would result in people bringing up their pitchforks. I don't think that we're exaggerating here calling it a data breach - it is a gross misuse of personal information, however gained. And while I'll admit the term data breach is a bit of a stretch, the connotation of the word fits perfectly with the situation. People downloaded an app for a survey, had their entire social network scraped, and then had that information used for an ulterior motive, without them knowing at all. We should be holding them accountable for their scummy behavior. Facebook already is starting to. We've already seen the GOP bring up the email campaign and Benghazi for the entire length of the Clinton campaign. Note the irony here as the GOP is almost completely silent over America's current president's daily antics. It is the lack of response from the GOP toward any of the recent political events that is characterizing HN's response toward CA as overblown. So with that said, why do you believe that it's unethical to call out Trump and by extension CA's actions. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
        allthenews 9y ago
IAmEveryone 9y ago
There are at least 25 scandals surrounding the Trump administration currently that are each worse than the two pseudo-scandals surrounding HRC that Conservatives managed to drum up, I. e. E-Mails and “Benghazi”. And ts not like FOX and the entire US Congress have less power than the Guardian. So, no: “They are all the same” isn’t just cynical and useless. It’s also wrong.
- allthenews 9y ago
  So, in your opinion, this justifies the false headline of the article, and is reason to turn a blind eye to the same potential data abuse when committed by the other party? >They are all the same” isn’t just cynical and useless. It’s also wrong. Please do not put words in my mouth. All I am asking for is journalistic integrity. Media in the U.S. has proven repeatedly to be partisan, which, to a rational person, makes it very difficult to separate fact from propaganda. This article is a case in my point. Unethical politicking is not an excuse for spread of misinformation.
- cloakandswagger 9y ago
  > There are at least 25 scandals surrounding the Trump administration https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum I'd argue that this article pretty well encapsulates all of the various "scandals" the Trump administration is being bombarded with: breathlessly exaggerated so that people whose mind is already made up can scan over it and add another tickmark to their list of "scandals"

forapurpose 9y ago

It's essential to hold the President publicly accountable for his actions, especially when illicit actions pervert the foundation of the United States, the democratic process. That's not partisan; that's normal, healthy democracy; that's the primary public good provided by journalism.

allthenews 9y ago
Sure. But it is unethical to exaggerate and hold only part of the political system accountable for shady or illegal practices. This is part of a consistent pattern. Our media has become as hopelessly partisan as our unfortunate two party system, and unethical behavior on one front does not justify the same on another in response.
- Thorncorona 9y ago
  Can you explain why it's unethical to hold people accountable for their actions or actions others took on their behalf?
  - allthenews 9y ago
    From my post, again: >But it is unethical to exaggerate and hold only part of the political system accountable Please consider what I wrote in sum. Partisanship and exaggeration are antithetical to trust.
    - Thorncorona 9y ago
      Don't think the intent of my question was communicated clearly. Let's try again. From your original post: > The only reason this is exaggerated as a "data breech" is because of the connection to the Trump campaign. You have provided no evidence of this, and until you do, your comment is read as a case of whataboutism[0]. Because we are not shoehorned into the pursuit of a unilateral solution, we can both [A] call out Trump's unethical engagement of Cambridge Analytica (CA) and [B] lobby for more stringent privacy regulations, like the EU is doing. Given the, as a prior commenter said, 25 scandals, along with string of accusations of indecent conduct, collusion, etc. that Trump is clouded with, the conclusion being made is that his engagement is not the unknowing of an unethical actor acting on his behalf, rather the turning of a blind eye. So given the inflammatory nature of the original comment: > Let's be realistic here. This headline is nothing but partisanship. So in sum, on first glance your comment leads me to assume you have an agenda. Assuming that this isn't true, lets talk about main issue here: the micro targeting of ads, and the usage of this "data breach" in the Trump campaign. Frankly, this scares me. The power this data provides and the way that it can be wielded should scare people - who wants to live in a world where the government/corporations/people can induce people into certain behaviors? Whether Trump or Clinton uses this information would result in people bringing up their pitchforks. I don't think that we're exaggerating here calling it a data breach - it is a gross misuse of personal information, however gained. And while I'll admit the term data breach is a bit of a stretch, the connotation of the word fits perfectly with the situation. People downloaded an app for a survey, had their entire social network scraped, and then had that information used for an ulterior motive, without them knowing at all. We should be holding them accountable for their scummy behavior. Facebook already is starting to. We've already seen the GOP bring up the email campaign and Benghazi for the entire length of the Clinton campaign. Note the irony here as the GOP is almost completely silent over America's current president's daily antics. It is the lack of response from the GOP toward any of the recent political events that is characterizing HN's response toward CA as overblown. So with that said, why do you believe that it's unethical to call out Trump and by extension CA's actions. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
      - allthenews 9y ago

IAmEveryone 9y ago

There are at least 25 scandals surrounding the Trump administration currently that are each worse than the two pseudo-scandals surrounding HRC that Conservatives managed to drum up, I. e. E-Mails and “Benghazi”. And ts not like FOX and the entire US Congress have less power than the Guardian. So, no: “They are all the same” isn’t just cynical and useless. It’s also wrong.

allthenews 9y ago
So, in your opinion, this justifies the false headline of the article, and is reason to turn a blind eye to the same potential data abuse when committed by the other party? >They are all the same” isn’t just cynical and useless. It’s also wrong. Please do not put words in my mouth. All I am asking for is journalistic integrity. Media in the U.S. has proven repeatedly to be partisan, which, to a rational person, makes it very difficult to separate fact from propaganda. This article is a case in my point. Unethical politicking is not an excuse for spread of misinformation.
cloakandswagger 9y ago
> There are at least 25 scandals surrounding the Trump administration https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum I'd argue that this article pretty well encapsulates all of the various "scandals" the Trump administration is being bombarded with: breathlessly exaggerated so that people whose mind is already made up can scan over it and add another tickmark to their list of "scandals"