>"I have a problem with the way NYT is reporting on this whole thing." What "way" is that? By reporting facts? What "whole thing"? Facebook sharing user's data

>"I have a problem with the way NYT is reporting on this whole thing." What "way" is that? By reporting facts? What "whole thing"? Facebook sharing user's data with third parties without user's consent and then lying to congress about the continued existence of it? And doing so while they were under a consent decree by the FTC You mean that "whole thing"? They talked to 60 people for this piece including former FB employees and partners, they reviewed 270 pages of internal FB documents regarding the program. There were 5 contributors to the article. To suggest that this is just some flimsy piece of yellow journalism is a joke. >"The most egregious sounding parts of this (eg giving Spotify and Netflix the ability to read your messages) sounds like it was entirely tangential to what those agreements were all about." Unless you work for FB and were involved in negotiating these agreements how do you know "what those agreements were all about"? What we do know was that FB allowed third parties to access user's data without those user's knowledge or consent. Access to user data was exactly point, the carelessness with which FB did that can hardly be seen as a "tangent."