Saving Facebook

Get it?

So here's what I think about the news that data and information from Facebook's users were given to Cambridge Analytica in England and used in 2016 by its best known client, the Trump campaign, to target voters . . . is Mark Zuckerberg insane?

I, personally, am not bothered by the distribution of user data to Cambridge Analytica, because the Trump campaign couldn't have done anything with data on me. First of all, I can't stand Trump.  Second of all, I can't stand Hillary. Third of all, my support for Martin O'Malley, and then Jill Stein, probably aroused more guffaws among those who saw it than anything else.  But using information people only want to share with friends and violating their privacy without permission goes beyond the pale.        

I pretty much make a lot of posts public (not just limited to friends), because I rarely post anything personal.  If I don't want people to know something, I don't mention it on Facebook.  What is the kicker here is that Facebook allowed people's data to be used in a way that they hadn't intended.  It was based on their likes and dislikes, and as innocuous at that seems, such data has been used before by advertisers to pitch directly to Facebook users based on such information.  But the Cambridge Analytica ploy made this date available and exploitable in ways no one would have allowed if given the chance to stop it.   

Facebook has put the following message on its home page regarding the application "This Is Your Digital Life," which got so much information for Cambridge Analytica in the first place: 

"We understand the importance of keeping your data safe. We have banned the app 'This Is Your Digital Life,' which one of your friends used Facebook to log into. We did this because the app may have misused some of your Facebook information by sharing it with a company called Cambridge Analytica. In most cases, the information was limited to public profile, page likes, birthday, and current city. You can learn more about what happened and how you can remove apps and websites anytime if you no longer want them to have access to your Facebook information. There is more work to do, but we are committed to confronting abuse and to putting you in control of your privacy."

More work to do. But can anyone trust Mark Zuckerberg to do it?

Facebook executive Sheryl Sandberg got out in advance of Zuckerberg's testimony on Capitol Hill, apologizing profusely to every news media figure who interviewed her.  And when Zuckerberg did testify before members of the House and Senate, he offered pat, safe answers to the lawmakers' pat, safe questions.  Some of them may not have fully comprehended how Facebook operates.  And Zuckerberg was able to talk a great deal and say little.

Again, I like to think I'm pretty careful about what I share on Facebook and what I don't (I have made my love for Volkswagens obvious, but why would Volkswagen want to advertise to me, a loyal customer for eighteen years with no intention of abandoning the brand?), so I was not really scared by Zuckerberg's evasive testimony.

Mike Pompeo's evasive testimony was what I had a problem with.  A homophobic hawk as Secretary of State? :-O