I know a lot of folks have been desperate to make a false equivalence with the Obama campaign's social media use, but it doesn't pass the sniff test:
https://washingtonmonthly.com/2018/03/21/no-obama-didnt-empl...
I know a lot of folks have been desperate to make a false equivalence with the Obama campaign's social media use, but it doesn't pass the sniff test:
https://washingtonmonthly.com/2018/03/21/no-obama-didnt-empl...
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/facebook-data-....
"Facebook was surprised we were able to suck out the whole social graph, but they didn't stop us once they realized that was what we were doing." - Carol Davidsen, Former Obama Campaign Director
They used the exact same technique to access data from 190 million profiles - and about 189 million of those were without explicit authorization. Exactly the same technique, just with 4X the reach that CA had.
If you know of any evidence that Obama's campaign broke either the law or FB's ToS, please let me know.
That is simply not true. Facebook rate-limited apps for exactly this reason. Additionally, although it was technically possible, the TOS did not allow mass-scraping of friend data for any purpose, much less political purposes. Facebook monitored and routinely banned apps long before they ever accessed the data of even a few million friend profiles, let alone 190 million of them. That's why, according to Obama's own campaign manager, Facebook was "surprised" but then decided not to ban them - which they would have done to any other app.
the data was used for political microtargeting (in violation of FB's TOS)
Which is precisely what Obama did.
If you know of any evidence that Obama's campaign broke either the law or FB's ToS, please let me know.
See above.
Was it bad management ?
Was it not using Facebook data effectively ?
Was CA that pivotal? Was it fake news or better microtargetting?
If both sides used it why did one side lose?