Talk:Facebook–Cambridge Analytica data scandal
![]() | This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jasonyangchen (article contribs).
![]() | The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
|
![]() | The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: |
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 13 January 2020 and 1 May 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Hughbreslin, Jbsimmon (article contribs).
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 January 2020 and 29 April 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Alex K. Tran, Millyphilip, Natasha.Holdt, EstabanMiranda (article contribs). Peer reviewers: D3032447367, Malberk, Gobears15.
Wishes for this article's development
- Did Cambridge Analytica use any software from GitHub or any other public repository?
- Does anyone have a sample entry from the dataset which we can anonymize and use as an illustration?
- Does anyone have a source which characterizes the dataset?
- There are so many names of individuals and companies in this story. How can anyone sort this?
- There seems to be an international response to this. Searching "Cambridge Analytica" and various countries could return regional responses.
- Check out Category:Data breaches for what exists. Anyone who searches the news can find other data breaches which meet WP:N but for which wiki does not have an article.
- We need a Wikidata data model for items on data breaches. I did not make one for this article.
Blue Rasberry (talk) 04:35, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
Requested move 26 March 2018
- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: moved. See general agreement to sub "scandal" for "breach" in this debate, even though we see good args for both cases. Have a Great Day and Happy Publishing! (closed by page mover) Paine Ellsworth put'r there 03:26, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
Facebook and Cambridge Analytica data breach → Facebook–Cambridge Analytica data scandal – Whether or not this amounts to a "data breach" is debatable, according to Time.com. The article title should try to avoid this debate, according to WP:POVTITLE. FallingGravity 14:59, 26 March 2018 (UTC)--Relisting. Dekimasuよ! 18:32, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
- Not sure what is actually the more objective phrasing. Depends on the definitions of breach and scandal I suppose. From the article about data breach: "A data breach is the intentional or unintentional release of secure or private/confidential information to an untrusted environment." The term scandal may also be value laden, I think. But I'm not a native English speaker, so I shall refrain from having an actual opinion about this question. - Soulkeeper (talk) 15:50, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
- If both phrases are equally objective then it would be the more common one that we should use. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:06, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
- "Controversy" is generally considered to be less objective or value laden, though "scandal" is technically a specific type of controversy. "Data breach" might have legal ramifications, so it's understandable that Facebook wants to avoid it. FallingGravity 19:40, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
- If both phrases are equally objective then it would be the more common one that we should use. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:06, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
- use data breach I just added sources below which use the term "breach". I acknowledge that Facebook's own lawyer in a Facebook press release says, "The claim that this is a data breach is completely false", but also, Facebook is telling many different stories as compared to what the news media reports. I appreciate FallingGravity presenting the controversy, because yes obviously, Facebook really cares about this term for some reason. In reading that Time article I do not believe that that publication feels strongly about the matter. I recognize also that security professionals have a different concept of "breach" than layman audiences. To security professionals, a breach is a process, and if someone steals or misuses data without attacking the vault, then they say there was no breach. From the consumer perspective, a breach is an outcome, and if someone steals or misuses their data by attacking, sneaking, leaking, or any other way that harms them, then it is all the same because they expected protection which the vault failed to provide. Reliable sources call this a data breach, the situation matches what Wikipedia calls data breach, and the consumers suffered a data breach. Blue Rasberry (talk) 01:21, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
Sources say "breach"
- The Guardian, "one of the tech giant’s biggest ever data breaches"[1]
- The New York Times, "...one of the largest data leaks in the social network’s history. The breach allowed the company to exploit the private social media activity..."[2]
- Vox Media
- The Dallas Morning News, "How GDPR Could Have Prevented the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica Data Breach"[5]
- The Times of Israel, "Israel to probe Facebook over Cambridge Analytica data breach"[6]
- The Times of India, "Facebook data breach case: Government issues notice to Cambridge Analytica"[7]
- Reuters, "India queries Cambridge Analytica over alleged Facebook data breach"[8]
- Deutsche Welle, "Germany demands answers from Facebook over data breach"[9]
References
- ^ Graham-Harrison, Emma; Cadwalladr, Carole (17 March 2018). "Revealed: 50 million Facebook profiles harvested for Cambridge Analytica in major data breach". the Guardian. Archived from the original on 18 March 2018.
{{cite web}}
: Unknown parameter|deadurl=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (help) - ^ Rosenberg, Matthew; Confessore, Nicholas; Cadwalladr, Carole (17 March 2018). "How Trump Consultants Exploited the Facebook Data of Millions". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 17 March 2018.
{{cite web}}
: Unknown parameter|deadurl=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (help) - ^ Romano, Aja (20 March 2018). "The Facebook data breach wasn't a hack. It was a wake-up call". Vox.
- ^ Liao, Shannon (23 March 2018). "Facebook hit with four lawsuits in one week over Cambridge Analytica scandal". The Verge.
- ^ Adler, Hillary (2 April 2018). "How GDPR Could Have Prevented the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica Data Breach". The Dallas Morning News.
- ^ Wootliff, Raoul (22 March 2018). "Israel to probe Facebook over Cambridge Analytica data breach". The Times of Israel.
- ^ "Facebook data breach case: Government issues notice to Cambridge Analytica". The Times of India. 23 March 2018.
- ^ Reuters Staff (24 March 2018). "India queries Cambridge Analytica over alleged Facebook data breach". Reuters.
{{cite web}}
:|author1=
has generic name (help) - ^ "Germany demands answers from Facebook over data breach". Deutsche Welle. 22 March 2018.
Blue Rasberry (talk) 01:10, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
- Some sources say "breach", but some sources avoid the terminology in favor of "scandal":
- Wall Street Journal: "Facebook Data Scandal Raises Another Question: Can There Be Too Much Privacy?"
- Bloomberg: "What Facebook’s Data Scandal Really Means for Regulators"
- NBC News: "After the Cambridge Analytica Facebook scandal, here's what Mark Zuckerberg must do to save his company"
- HuffPost: "The Facebook/Cambridge Analytica Scandal, According To My Mom"
- Recode: "The FTC is officially investigating Facebook following the Cambridge Analytica privacy scandal"
- The Telegraph: "Elon Musk deletes Facebook following Cambridge Analytica scandal"
- TechCrunch: "Zuck apologizes for Cambridge Analytica scandal with full-page print ad"
- CNET: "Amid Facebook data scandal, Apple CEO Cook talks up regulation"
- AP: "Facebook scandal affected more users than thought: up to 87M"
- Anyway, we should definitely go by the WP:COMMONNAME. FallingGravity 07:10, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
- Support for "Facebook–Cambridge Analytica data scandal". This whole article seems to have some major POV issues, the title being one of them. In addition to the many links others have posted above, here's a few reliable secondary sources talking about whether or not this was a "breach", with several of them taking the opinion that it is not:
- There is clearly enough dispute about this that it would not be neutral for Wikipedia to retain this article title per WP:POVTITLE. I didn't like "Facebook–Cambridge Analytica data scandal" when I first read it, but after reading the definition of scandal in the intro of its article, I think it's appropriate here and strikes a good WP:BALANCE. –IagoQnsi (talk) 07:10, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
- Support as proposed - it's unquestionably the latter, and only arguably the former. Red Slash 09:27, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
This Is Your Digital Life
https://www.facebook.com/help/1873665312923476 is the Facebook page that can tell person if Cambridge Analytica likely had their data. For me, the results are:
- Based on our available records, neither you nor your friends logged into This Is Your Digital Life."
- As a result, it doesn't appear your Facebook information was shared with Cambridge Analytica by "This Is Your Digital Life."
I wanted to learn about the history of the "This Is Your Digital Life" app but was very surprised there are zero mentions of that phrase on Wikipedia per site:wikipedia.org "This Is Your Digital Life" other than sv:Cambridge Analytica on the Swedish Language Wikipedia which mentions ... ett personlighetstest vid namn "this is your digital life" på Facebook för att få tillgång till drygt 50 miljoner användares data or in English ... a personality test called "this is your digital life" on Facebook accessed over 50 million users' data.[1][2]--Marc Kupper|talk 17:53, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
References
- ^ Johansson, Sandra (2018-03-27). "Cambridge Analytica stänger av vd:n". SvD.se (in Swedish).
- ^ "Facebook bans political data company Cambridge Analytica". Financial Times. 2018-03-27.
declaration of COI
So I just changed the wording on something in this article and then I remembered to declare that I have a COI. I have done work with this project and the professor as a freelancer. I will probably try to avoid future editing this topic but there is a ref that I would like to add when I find it again.TeeVeeed (talk) 14:19, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
NPOV
How about mentioning that Google CEO Eric Schmidt proposed in emails to the Clinton Campaign doing exactly the same thing that Cambridge Analytica did, and more? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.193.159.54 (talk) 21:56, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- Source? Also could you provide a reputable source saying it's "doing exactly the same thing that Cambridge Analytica did". FallingGravity 22:38, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
"Use of the data" section deletions
Various political organizations used information from the data breach to attempt to influence public opinion. Political events for which politicians paid Cambridge Analytica to use information from the data breach include the following: Political events for which politicians paid Cambridge Analytica to use information from the data breach include the 2015 and 2016 campaigns of United States politician Ted Cruz.[1]
- 2015 and 2016 campaigns of United States politicians Donald Trump and Ted Cruz[1]
- 2016 Brexit vote[2]
- 2018 2018 Mexican general election, for Institutional Revolutionary Party[3][4][5][6]
Items were deleted from the above section, with an ES of "Removed reference to Donald Trump, 2016 Brexit vote, 2018 Mexican general election. The cited articles cover Cambridge Analytica's activities, but do not explicitly state that these three political events were ones for which politicians paid Cambridge Analytica to use information from the data breach." I don't see the problem as items were written. X1\ (talk) 21:16, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
References
- ^ a b Davies, Harry (December 11, 2015). "Ted Cruz campaign using firm that harvested data on millions of unwitting Facebook users". The Guardian. Archived from the original on February 16, 2016.
{{cite web}}
: Unknown parameter|deadurl=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (help) - ^ Cadwalladr, Carole; Townsend, Mark (March 24, 2018). "Revealed: the ties that bind Vote Leave's data firm to controversial Cambridge Analytica". the Guardian. Archived from the original on March 25, 2018.
{{cite web}}
: Unknown parameter|deadurl=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (help) - ^ Staff, Forbes (March 30, 2018). "Cambridge Analytica trabajó con el PRI: Channel 4 News • Forbes México". Forbes.com.mx. Retrieved April 9, 2018.
- ^ Murillo, Javier. "Cambridge Analytica, sigan la ruta del dinero". Elfinanciero.com.mx. Retrieved April 9, 2018.
- ^ Peinado, Fernando; Palomo, Elvira; Galán, Javier (March 22, 2018). "The distorted online networks of Mexico's election campaign". Elpais.com. Retrieved April 9, 2018.
- ^ Ahmed, Azam; Hakim, Danny (June 24, 2018). "Mexico's Hardball Politics Get Even Harder as PRI Fights to Hold On to Power". Retrieved December 20, 2018 – via NYTimes.com.
Resulting research organization - new article
Lots of sources report that Facebook's response to this scandal include establishing this organization. Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:34, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
add California's investigation?
From Portal:Current events/2019 November 6:
- Facebook–Cambridge Analytica data scandal
- A court filing by California Attorney General Xavier Becerra reveals for the first time that the state launched an 18-month investigation into Facebook’s privacy issues in response to the Cambridge Analytica scandal. The filing accuses the company of refusing to cooperate with investigators, and asks the court to require them to turn over information regarding third-party access to data and changes in privacy settings. (Reuters)
X1\ (talk) 01:33, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
"Reactions" instead of "Responses
Can a section be added instead of the "Responses" called "Reactions" which details the wave of Privacy Policy changes on social media/messaging sites? [1]Millyphilip (talk) 02:50, 5 February 2020 (UTC) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Millyphilip/Evaluate_an_Article
- I would recommend adding to the section called "responses." I feel as if reactions are personal the while responses that you are describing can be done by a corporation. I think you have listed some excellent sources below, and I would recommend adding these sources as you edit the article.Jerrysong1324 (talk) 04:51, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Proposed sources for changes and addition of details.
https://about.fb.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/state-by-state-breakdown.pdf https://about.fb.com/news/2018/04/restricting-data-access/ https://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-cambridge-analytica-affected-us-states-graphic-2018-6 https://www.theguardian.com/membership/2018/sep/29/cambridge-analytica-cadwalladr-observer-facebook-zuckerberg-wylie https://www.theguardian.com/news/series/cambridge-analytica-files Carol Callwadr’s earliest article monitoring them: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/04/cambridge-analytica-democracy-digital-age https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/04/us/politics/cambridge-analytica-scandal-fallout.html Russian Oil ppl: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/17/us/politics/cambridge-analytica-russia.html Trump: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/17/us/politics/cambridge-analytica-trump-campaign.html?login=smartlock&auth=login-smartlock&login=smartlock&auth=login-smartlock https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/10/facebook-cambridge-analytica-a-timeline-of-the-data-hijacking-scandal.html https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/apr/11/mark-zuckerbergs-testimony-to-congress-the-key-moments https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EgrrR1M2Ck https://www.cnn.com/business/live-news/f8-2019-keynote/index.html https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jan/04/cambridge-analytica-data-leak-global-election-manipulation https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/us-election-trump-cambridge-analytica-facebook-fake-news-brexit-vote-leave-a9304421.html https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/17/cambridge-analytica-facebook-influence-us-election The Great Hack (Netflix Documentary) EstabanMiranda (talk) 01:34, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
Peer Review
General info Whose work are you reviewing? (provide username)
- EstabanMiranda
Link to draft you're reviewing:
Overall evaluation
- I was unable to find the exact draft under EstabanMiranda's sandbox. In contrast, EstabanMiranda and his group were able to point out specific things they will be implementing for the article. In this case, I will be critiquing the information given. In all, there are alot of good points that the group wants to add into the article. I think adding an impact section is a good idea because a lot of social media platforms changed their privacy and ad policies after this scandal. I was hoping the group would go more in-depth on the exact changed and expansions they were going to make on each section.
Malberk (talk) 02:03, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
Peer Evaluation
Lead: The lead, at first glance, is very lengthy and can be cut down to only address the main points of the scandal, who is involved, and why it was so important. Continuing, some of the language in the lead seems to detract from an informative tone and instead hints towards a negative view of Facebook. While the topic is a scandal, it is important to present the facts and allow the reader to make that decision for themselves.
Content: In the "Use of the data" section, I would recommend doing more research and uncovering more ways into specifically how the data was used and in what other campaigns across the world that data was used for. There is more expansion in your proposed edits however I feel that this is an important point in your article and elaborating on it would greatly improve the article.
Tone and Balance: The tone of this article is difficult to address because it inherently places Facebook in a negative light due to the nature of the issue. However, it is important to be unbiased in presenting the facts and to limit flowery language that seems to point to a specific argument against Facebook rather than the entire climate of the situation.
Sources and References: This article does an excellent job of using citations properly and referencing other wiki articles that are relevant when necessary.
Organization: In regards to the organization, subtopics can be incorporated in this article to help the flow of information and to allow readers to specifically find information about the topic. For example, in the "use of the data" section, there can be separate subsections for the different campaigns they were used which would also allow you to expand on each section and provide more relevant information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gobears15 (talk • contribs) 03:00, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
- Start-Class Internet articles
- Low-importance Internet articles
- WikiProject Internet articles
- Start-Class Internet culture articles
- Low-importance Internet culture articles
- WikiProject Internet culture articles
- Start-Class Computer Security articles
- High-importance Computer Security articles
- Start-Class Computer Security articles of High-importance
- Start-Class Computing articles
- Unknown-importance Computing articles
- All Computing articles
- All Computer Security articles
- Start-Class Elections and Referendums articles
- WikiProject Elections and Referendums articles
- Articles edited by connected contributors