Prepare for a long line of these. Data and access to data has been far more valuable than the vast majority of us realise and that data has been sold and exploited for a much longer time than we would believe. Ask yourself a couple of questions - why are most email services provided free-of-charge? They give you the software, the email addresses and they host your data - all of that costs money but they never ask you for a bean. Similarly social media sites. They have hundreds of thousands of square feet of highly sophisticated and expensive computer equipment in temperature controlled, secure environments storing all your 'trivial' data and they don't charge you a cent? Yes, advertising brings in revenues but the real money is in manipulating that data, profiling you and using that intelligence to manage your environment and influence your behaviours, primarily in how you spend your money. In my view and from some experience, they often cross the line in terms of analysing that data in a way they shouldn't, selling it in a way they aren't entitled to and often accessing it via computers before you do, which is illegal.
Err?
Que?
Sorry CS, just doing an impression of 99.9% of the population who use social media. You are bang on in your analysis, which I am sure will wind up in some database somewhere out there...
Ownership of CA includes Robert Mercer, a hedge fund CEO, who funded CA's work on Farage's strand of the Brexit/Leave campaign and was a major contributor to first Cruz and then Trump's presidential campaigns. He's also a major funder of Breitbart, obviously synonymous with Steve Bannon...also a co-founder of Cambridge Analytica.
Nix is a small cog in this, but has other outlets for his shady dealings as a director, along with members of the Mercer family in Emerdata Limited, recently set up. Regardless of whether their power is real or bravado, I suspect these businesses will fall away, but the players will continue their practices in the shadows.
Mile Flynn was also an advisor in some capacity to CA. He failed to disclose this on his original financial forms for the Government.
The data watchdog has closed its investigation into Cambridge Analytica, concluding that the controversial data company did not directly misuse data to influence the Brexit referendum.
Elizabeth Denham, the information commissioner, said her team also found no evidence Cambridge Analytica aided Russian intervention in the UK political process. However, she warned that the company’s data protection practices were lax “with little thought for effective security measures” and its activities raised broader concerns about the influence of technology in politics.
Cambridge Analytica had repeatedly claimed in its marketing material to have “5,000+ data points per individual on 230 million adult Americans”, suggesting it had incredible power to micro-target individuals with suggestive political messaging using a giant psychographic database.
However, the investigation concluded that “based on what we found it appears that this may have been an exaggeration” and much of the company’s activities followed “well recognised processes using commonly available technology”.
The Information Commissioner’s Office spent three years investigating the company, which collapsed in 2018. Cambridge Analytica’s downfall led to a global debate on the use of data targeting in politics and a reckoning for major technology companies who were pilloried by governments around the world, prompting the introduction of restrictions on political advertising on major social media platforms.
Denham said her team analysed 42 computers, 700 terabytes of data, 31 servers, and more than 300,000 documents as part of their investigation into potential data offences. In a letter to MPs she said that although there was no evidence of law breaches to justify enforcement action, Cambridge Analytica’s activities “confirms my earlier conclusion that there are systemic vulnerabilities in our democratic systems”.
Denham said she found no evidence that Cambridge Analytica were actively involved in the EU referendum campaign, beyond an early proposal to work with UKIP which was not put into action. The successful Vote Leave campaign, run by Dominic Cummings, instead employed the services of AggregateIQ, a Canadian data targeting company which had historic links to Cambridge Analytica.
Last month Cambridge Analytica founder Alexander Nix was disqualified from acting as a company director for seven years for “offering potentially unethical services to prospective clients” including bribery or honey trap stings, voter disengagement campaigns, obtaining information to discredit political opponents, and spreading information anonymously in political campaigns.
Cambridge Analytica’s sister company SCL Elections has already been fined £18,000 for failing to comply with a request for personal data filed by US academic David Carroll. He wanted to obtain information on how he may have been targeted by Republican campaigners using the company’s services during the 2016 presidential election.
As part of its investigations the ICO also handed down a £500,000 fine to Facebook and smaller penalties to both Vote Leave and Leave.EU.
Comments
Que?
Sorry CS, just doing an impression of 99.9% of the population who use social media. You are bang on in your analysis, which I am sure will wind up in some database somewhere out there...
http://www.latimes.com/politics/washington/la-na-essential-washington-updates-michael-flynn-files-new-financial-form-1501846434-htmlstory.html
The data watchdog has closed its investigation into Cambridge Analytica, concluding that the controversial data company did not directly misuse data to influence the Brexit referendum.
Elizabeth Denham, the information commissioner, said her team also found no evidence Cambridge Analytica aided Russian intervention in the UK political process. However, she warned that the company’s data protection practices were lax “with little thought for effective security measures” and its activities raised broader concerns about the influence of technology in politics.
Cambridge Analytica had repeatedly claimed in its marketing material to have “5,000+ data points per individual on 230 million adult Americans”, suggesting it had incredible power to micro-target individuals with suggestive political messaging using a giant psychographic database.
However, the investigation concluded that “based on what we found it appears that this may have been an exaggeration” and much of the company’s activities followed “well recognised processes using commonly available technology”.
The Information Commissioner’s Office spent three years investigating the company, which collapsed in 2018. Cambridge Analytica’s downfall led to a global debate on the use of data targeting in politics and a reckoning for major technology companies who were pilloried by governments around the world, prompting the introduction of restrictions on political advertising on major social media platforms.
Denham said her team analysed 42 computers, 700 terabytes of data, 31 servers, and more than 300,000 documents as part of their investigation into potential data offences. In a letter to MPs she said that although there was no evidence of law breaches to justify enforcement action, Cambridge Analytica’s activities “confirms my earlier conclusion that there are systemic vulnerabilities in our democratic systems”.
Denham said she found no evidence that Cambridge Analytica were actively involved in the EU referendum campaign, beyond an early proposal to work with UKIP which was not put into action. The successful Vote Leave campaign, run by Dominic Cummings, instead employed the services of AggregateIQ, a Canadian data targeting company which had historic links to Cambridge Analytica.
Last month Cambridge Analytica founder Alexander Nix was disqualified from acting as a company director for seven years for “offering potentially unethical services to prospective clients” including bribery or honey trap stings, voter disengagement campaigns, obtaining information to discredit political opponents, and spreading information anonymously in political campaigns.
Cambridge Analytica’s sister company SCL Elections has already been fined £18,000 for failing to comply with a request for personal data filed by US academic David Carroll. He wanted to obtain information on how he may have been targeted by Republican campaigners using the company’s services during the 2016 presidential election.
As part of its investigations the ICO also handed down a £500,000 fine to Facebook and smaller penalties to both Vote Leave and Leave.EU.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/oct/07/cambridge-analytica-did-not-misuse-data-in-eu-referendum-says-watchdog