|
|
Post by Cole Bell on Apr 13, 2018 3:25:41 GMT
When signing up for a social media site, everyone always worries about secure their personal information is, but in this situation, the personal information is not what is being taken. The Cambridge Analytica did not want the personal information, that wanted the data, the data about whatever they were hired to get. As for the site that is being infested with this "parasite", it puts you in a real bind,, and its exactly what happened to Facebook. Mark Zuckerberg was embarrassed that this happened on his site and he "promised to do better." As for the country that this is happening in, it leads you to decide whether or not you as a country should step in and crack down or not. Europe is cracking down, but i do not believe that this is the way to go. As for a social media platform, it is their responsibility to fix anything that is bothering its users. If the company can not keep information secret, then they do not deserve to have a following group. In conclusion, it is the platform's responsibility to protect information and if they can not do that, then they do not deserve to run the company.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wyatt Heyl on Apr 13, 2018 3:42:11 GMT
Whenever the whistleblower from Cambridge Analytica compares them to being an "example of what modern day colonialism looks like," yes I'd agree with that statement. To be able to understand this you need to understand what colonialism it, which the dictionary definition is the control or governing influence of a nation over a dependent country, territory, of people. Which to prove the whistleblower's statement, with one of Cambridge Analytica's scandals it involves Kenya's presidential election. They went into Kenya in order to be able collect data on citizens political views during the election. During and after the vote election officials realized that with Cambridge Analytica intervening it was swaying the votes in favor of current president of Kenya Uhuru Kenyatta. Cambridge Analytica deny these claims according to the Reuters article. So, yes Cambridge Analytica is an example of what modern colonialism looks like, Cambridge Analytica employee sums it up perfectly, "This is a company that goes around the world and undermines civic institutions of, you know, countries that are struggling to develop those institutions."
Also should countries follow Great Britain's footsteps to enforce the laws of security, no it lies in the responsibility of the social media or website. Mainly because whenever you first sign up on these websites or social media's they give you an entire essay about their security policies. It is all up to them however to own up to their own policies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chloe Fetter on Apr 13, 2018 3:59:37 GMT
Since the Cambridge Analytica’s scandal with 50 million documented users without consent, Facebook stock market has dramatically decreased. The firm did this in order to further political campaigns as well as observe how clients would vote. I do believe, as stated by CNBC.com, that this is a modern day form of colonialism in the sense that your personal information can be manipulated in subliminal ways in order to support or refute a cause. Your information is not safe. Also, it is said that nothing good ever comes from secrecy and it is quite compelling to say that this is true due to the lack of statements made by the firm and those associated with it. “Kogan could not be reached for comment,” (Reuters). Kogan is the british official that launched the application on which the Facebook users credentials were exposed. In a sense, it is the people’s responsibility to trust in what they do. In modern day, we are told from a very young age to never put on information out there on social media because it is liable to be abused by hackers and firms like Analytica. However Facebook’s CEO, Mark Zuckerburg, worth just shy of $70 billion might want to invest in better security for his users as there are billions of people connected with Facebook and sites like Facebook. I don’t rightfully think that sites should be able to have access to such information if they can’t keep it contained because so many people put their trust into them. That being said, it is a double edged sword because users should be aware that they are susceptible to losing their private information. It’s hard to decipher what to do in a situation like this, everyone is stunned. Maybe the government should step in, in order to provide more reliable protection against these dangers since social media is on the high rise and, “the company also said it targeted youth voters with a social media campaign.” (New York Times) Do we really want our youth to be exposed to this? Does it affect the way they will vote or comprehend civic duties?
|
|
|
|
Post by Laura Gutauskas on Apr 14, 2018 15:55:33 GMT
@chloefetter I like how you brought up Mark Zuckerberg’s worth as a point because he hasn’t kept his word when it comes to looking out for his users and keeping them safe. The problem isn’t that he’s selfish with his billions of dollars, since in 2015 he pledged to donate a majority of his wealth to charities through the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative. So, knowing that, what do you think is the reason for not putting enough money into security? To answer your other questions, I really worry about what impact this could have on the next generation since it may politically sway youth with misleading information which can lead to further partisan issues if it isn’t put to a stop.
|
|
|
|
Post by Laura Gutauskas on Apr 15, 2018 3:21:02 GMT
@matt They should definitely be heavily watched, although not completely outlawed. Of course, it’s up to law enforcers to make sure these companies follow proper privacy laws even if they are being watched because it’s possible for them to turn a blind eye to their actions. If it came down to this, then it should be outlawed altogether, but even then there would probably still be a breach of compliance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brooke Gentile on Apr 15, 2018 15:17:36 GMT
@barbie
I love how you made that connection to what you shop for on amazon, and how you later see those same items on other sites. This same thing happens with me while I shop for clothes, and later that day some of the things I have in my cart will appear on an add on my Instagram feed. I also agree that it is a little concerning that it seems everything we look at is being monitored by numerous companies world wide.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brooke Gentile on Apr 15, 2018 15:30:29 GMT
@matt
To answer your question “ Do you think companies like this should be outlawed or more heavily watched?” Personally I feel that they should just be more heavily watched. As Barbie and I said, some companies just simply track what you look at or what you have in your cart, and then put an add out to make you view that item again making you more likely to buy it. I’m those cases the companies are being harmless, and just want to make sales. However I feel that this should be heavily watched because it is something that could be taken advantage of and used for the wrong reasons.
|
|
|
|
Post by Meghan Miller on Apr 15, 2018 18:59:04 GMT
@matt To answer your question, yes I believe that these companies should be outlawed. The purpose of their companies is to extract data from unwilling people to manipulate them into acting or voting a certain way. I also believe that it would be almost impossible to outlaw these types of companies, Cambridge Analytica alone is involved in hundreds of elections. Many candidates believe that to win an election they must manipulate the voters, and that is done easily through countries like Cambridge Analytica. In a perfect world companies like these would be outlawed completely, but we live in a world were corruption is rampant.
|
|
|
|
Post by Meghan Miller on Apr 15, 2018 19:04:30 GMT
@chloe I believe these companies will affect how the youth (us included) will preform civic duties. These companies use psychological tactics to subtly influence their targets. They will purposefully pick ads, recommended videos, and sponsored content to try and influence and manipulate how people vote. This manipulation will still go on, even after this large scandal, because it would be so difficult to stop. These companies will affect how the youth votes and will probably continue to do that for many generations to come.
|
|
|
|
Post by Maya French on Apr 15, 2018 22:00:54 GMT
@olivia, I loved the way that you posed the question, “how many people want to know what their spirit animal is? Or who their significant other is? Or what they would look like as the opposite gender? How many people have clicked on those questions/links on Facebook and then clicked the “allow access to my profile” button when they got there?” I myself never do these because I am a highly defensive person when it comes to the internet but I know plenty of people who do these. You can not open Facebook without seeing a “what’s your next tattoo” or “how will you die” survey that someone has taken and found amusing enough to share. People are very trusting when it comes to the internet and their information, too much so in fact. Although they claim the information was just what the users were viewing, if they are able to access that, what is stopping them from taking more? It is truly a scary thought and one that many people are aware of but simply avoid out of convenience.
|
|
|
|
Post by Maya French on Apr 15, 2018 22:20:13 GMT
@maya B, I was a little confused by your question because it wasn't the personal information of the users that this company was obtaining. It was data on things such as the pages they viewed, how often they viewed them, what pictures they liked, what political information they were exposed to, and so on. Although, to answer your question, I would be more upset with a major company having access to my information because they would be much harder to have reprimanded for such actions and less likely to be properly prosecuted. Major companies have a tendency to get away with a lot more than the average individual in today’s society.
|
|
jonah
New Member
Posts: 16 
|
Post by jonah on Apr 16, 2018 1:05:49 GMT
brooke Let me ask you this. When you watch TV, do you think every pop brand is good? Moreover do you think every brand and type of chocolate is good? All these companies that have any type of advertising try to bring you in and have you try their "all new Hershey gold bar get it now limited time offer" aren't these companies trying to sway your mindset to their product? It is completely legal to advertise in this way, isn't it legal to advertise a political campaign in this form also? The only illegal thing that Cambridge Analytica did was take a bunch of data from people without the people's consent. All the things tied with getting information out to possible voters is not illegal or against the law. Also Cambridge Analytica didn't use fake news in order to sway votes they used real facts and positive messages to show people the truth.
|
|
jonah
New Member
Posts: 16
|
Post by jonah on Apr 16, 2018 1:10:06 GMT
@cole I agree with you. The government really has no say when it comes to this type of stuff. Yes if someone steals information without user consent then the government can step. But I agree it is the media platforms responsibility to crack down on things like this.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cole Bell on Apr 16, 2018 3:05:45 GMT
@matt These companies should not be outlawed, it is the social media's fault that they let them invade their company. Law enforcement should not have to interfere with anything in a company's business.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cole Bell on Apr 16, 2018 3:09:41 GMT
@mayab If information is being stolen, its being taken. End of conversation. If you put it on there, it is at risk of being taken and whether a big or small company. It is still your information in someone's hands that it shouldn't be.
|
|
