3 ms·

Not at all. Just media's desperate hunger for any story that paints Trump in a bad light. The recent video evidence on Cambridge Analytica shows that they were

Not at all. Just media's desperate hunger for any story that paints Trump in a bad light. The recent video evidence on Cambridge Analytica shows that they were at least shady in their operations. But their approach to targeting voters and scraping Facebook userdata would have been described as brilliant data wizzardry if it were done for the other side.

ams6110 9y ago
And it was described as brilliant, when Obama did it in his campaigns.
- txcwpalpha 9y ago
  It was also described as "groundbreaking", a "game changer", and "an application that will change the way campaigns are conducted in the future" [1]. When Obama's campaign did it, it was heralded as the future of democracy. Even the social media director for Obama's 2012 campaign acknowledges that they did the exact same thing that CA is being blasted for now [2]. I'm not sure why you're getting downvotes other than people just wanting to suppress the truth. 1: http://swampland.time.com/2012/11/20/friended-how-the-obama-campaign-connected-with-young-voters/ http://swampland.time.com/2012/11/20/friended-how-the-obama-... 2: https://twitter.com/cld276/status/975568130117459975 https://twitter.com/cld276/status/975568130117459975
Angostura 9y ago
... or not http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/07/AR2006030701860.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03...
- ams6110 9y ago
  http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/23/magazine/the-obama-campaigns-digital-masterminds-cash-in.html http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/23/magazine/the-obama-campaig... ... the campaign literally knew every single wavering voter in the country that it needed to persuade to vote for Obama, by name, address, race, sex and income. ...the digital-analytics team, led by Rayid Ghani, a 35-year-old research scientist from Accenture Labs, developed an idea: Why not try sifting through self-described supporters’ Facebook pages in search of friends who might be on the campaign’s list of the most persuadable voters? Then the campaign could ask the self-identified supporters to bring their undecided friends along. ...They started with a list that grew to a million people who had signed into the campaign Web site through Facebook. When people opted to do so, they were met with a prompt asking to grant the campaign permission to scan their Facebook friends lists, their photos and other personal information. So, they used Facebook data, including "Friends" lists and personal information that those "Friends" had never directly consented to providing to the campaign.
  - rrauenza 9y ago
    Quoting a conservative source: [1] How did Facebook react to the much larger data harvesting of the Obama campaign? The New York Times reported it out, in a feature hailing Obama’s digital masterminds: The campaign’s exhaustive use of Facebook triggered the site’s internal safeguards. “It was more like we blew through an alarm that their engineers hadn’t planned for or knew about,” said [Will] St. Clair, who had been working at a small firm in Chicago and joined the campaign at the suggestion of a friend. “They’d sigh and say, ‘You can do this as long as you stop doing it on Nov. 7.’ " In other words, Silicon Valley is just making up the rules as they go along. Some large-scale data harvesting and social manipulation is okay until the election. Some of it becomes not okay in retrospect. They sigh and say okay so long as Obama wins. When Clinton loses, they effectively call a code red. [1] https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/03/cambridge-analytica-social-media-panic/ https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/03/cambridge-analytica-s...
    - 1337biz 9y ago
      Really brutal how unashamed they have become about their biases. No wonder people are getting so angry against the media and big tech while those still play the facade of a fair game.
- txcwpalpha 9y ago
  Did you actually even read your own link? I don't think it says what you think it says. That story you linked is about how democrats in 2006 wanted to do more data collection but couldn't agree on whether it should be the DNC or a private firm that did the data collection. The one thing they could agree on was that data collection was something they should be doing.
  - Angostura 9y ago
    The post I was commenting on claimed similar actions were, or would have been lauded if carried out by Democrats. I simply posted an article critical of similar moves.
DFHippie 9y ago
You can perform brilliant data wizardry without deceiving people. Micro-targeting has been around since the 60s. There is a huge gulf between finding people receptive to an ad whose content you publicly endorse and creating astroturf sites and fake news content to manipulate people's world view. I keep seeing comments which equating cheating and cleverness. If I win a chess game by moving making illegal moves this is not a sign of my brilliance. If you can't distinguish brilliant play from cheating, perhaps you don't understand the game.
- freeone3000 9y ago
  What is cheating, in reality? What are these rules you endorse? What makes a hypothetical not cheating but a hypothetical presented as fact cheating?
- bobcostas55 9y ago
  The Obama campaign literally did the exact same thing as CA. See this thread: https://twitter.com/cld276/status/975564499297226752 https://twitter.com/cld276/status/975564499297226752 Here's Time describing exactly the same tactic of friend-mining and using the data for targeting, and praising it as a game-changer: http://swampland.time.com/2012/11/20/friended-how-the-obama-campaign-connected-with-young-voters/ http://swampland.time.com/2012/11/20/friended-how-the-obama-... ctrl+f privacy -> no results When we do it it's awesome, when they do it it's a data breach, it's a privacy violation, it's a breach of trust, and it requires government regulation.
Feniks 9y ago
Not by me. IDGAF about Trump or American politics. I hate all marketing and advertising equally whether you're selling a politician or cars. The real story is that there is an entire industry that needs to be reined in, starting with Facebook. Sadly I'm not too optimistic. But whatever: I will just continue to use ublock origin.

ams6110 9y ago

And it was described as brilliant, when Obama did it in his campaigns.

txcwpalpha 9y ago
It was also described as "groundbreaking", a "game changer", and "an application that will change the way campaigns are conducted in the future" [1]. When Obama's campaign did it, it was heralded as the future of democracy. Even the social media director for Obama's 2012 campaign acknowledges that they did the exact same thing that CA is being blasted for now [2]. I'm not sure why you're getting downvotes other than people just wanting to suppress the truth. 1: http://swampland.time.com/2012/11/20/friended-how-the-obama-campaign-connected-with-young-voters/ http://swampland.time.com/2012/11/20/friended-how-the-obama-... 2: https://twitter.com/cld276/status/975568130117459975 https://twitter.com/cld276/status/975568130117459975

Angostura 9y ago

... or not http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/07/AR2006030701860.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03...

ams6110 9y ago
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/23/magazine/the-obama-campaigns-digital-masterminds-cash-in.html http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/23/magazine/the-obama-campaig... ... the campaign literally knew every single wavering voter in the country that it needed to persuade to vote for Obama, by name, address, race, sex and income. ...the digital-analytics team, led by Rayid Ghani, a 35-year-old research scientist from Accenture Labs, developed an idea: Why not try sifting through self-described supporters’ Facebook pages in search of friends who might be on the campaign’s list of the most persuadable voters? Then the campaign could ask the self-identified supporters to bring their undecided friends along. ...They started with a list that grew to a million people who had signed into the campaign Web site through Facebook. When people opted to do so, they were met with a prompt asking to grant the campaign permission to scan their Facebook friends lists, their photos and other personal information. So, they used Facebook data, including "Friends" lists and personal information that those "Friends" had never directly consented to providing to the campaign.
- rrauenza 9y ago
  Quoting a conservative source: [1] How did Facebook react to the much larger data harvesting of the Obama campaign? The New York Times reported it out, in a feature hailing Obama’s digital masterminds: The campaign’s exhaustive use of Facebook triggered the site’s internal safeguards. “It was more like we blew through an alarm that their engineers hadn’t planned for or knew about,” said [Will] St. Clair, who had been working at a small firm in Chicago and joined the campaign at the suggestion of a friend. “They’d sigh and say, ‘You can do this as long as you stop doing it on Nov. 7.’ " In other words, Silicon Valley is just making up the rules as they go along. Some large-scale data harvesting and social manipulation is okay until the election. Some of it becomes not okay in retrospect. They sigh and say okay so long as Obama wins. When Clinton loses, they effectively call a code red. [1] https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/03/cambridge-analytica-social-media-panic/ https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/03/cambridge-analytica-s...
  - 1337biz 9y ago
    Really brutal how unashamed they have become about their biases. No wonder people are getting so angry against the media and big tech while those still play the facade of a fair game.
txcwpalpha 9y ago
Did you actually even read your own link? I don't think it says what you think it says. That story you linked is about how democrats in 2006 wanted to do more data collection but couldn't agree on whether it should be the DNC or a private firm that did the data collection. The one thing they could agree on was that data collection was something they should be doing.
- Angostura 9y ago
  The post I was commenting on claimed similar actions were, or would have been lauded if carried out by Democrats. I simply posted an article critical of similar moves.

DFHippie 9y ago

You can perform brilliant data wizardry without deceiving people. Micro-targeting has been around since the 60s. There is a huge gulf between finding people receptive to an ad whose content you publicly endorse and creating astroturf sites and fake news content to manipulate people's world view. I keep seeing comments which equating cheating and cleverness. If I win a chess game by moving making illegal moves this is not a sign of my brilliance. If you can't distinguish brilliant play from cheating, perhaps you don't understand the game.

freeone3000 9y ago
What is cheating, in reality? What are these rules you endorse? What makes a hypothetical not cheating but a hypothetical presented as fact cheating?
bobcostas55 9y ago
The Obama campaign literally did the exact same thing as CA. See this thread: https://twitter.com/cld276/status/975564499297226752 https://twitter.com/cld276/status/975564499297226752 Here's Time describing exactly the same tactic of friend-mining and using the data for targeting, and praising it as a game-changer: http://swampland.time.com/2012/11/20/friended-how-the-obama-campaign-connected-with-young-voters/ http://swampland.time.com/2012/11/20/friended-how-the-obama-... ctrl+f privacy -> no results When we do it it's awesome, when they do it it's a data breach, it's a privacy violation, it's a breach of trust, and it requires government regulation.

Feniks 9y ago

Not by me. IDGAF about Trump or American politics. I hate all marketing and advertising equally whether you're selling a politician or cars. The real story is that there is an entire industry that needs to be reined in, starting with Facebook. Sadly I'm not too optimistic. But whatever: I will just continue to use ublock origin.