Hacker News Reader

Comment by linusnext | Hacker News Reader

The story incorrectly reports the company was hired for the trump campaign to do data work. As per https://youtu.be/yjn6wK01cqk?t=1878 only staff were hired.

edit: provide link, and clarify.

View on HN

Fine, I will bite.

https://www.wired.com/story/what-did-cambridge-analytica-rea...

Cambridge worked both for the Trump campaign and a Trump-aligned Super PAC.

Cambridge Analytica was paid $5.9 million by the Trump campaign, according to Federal Election Commission filings

If you have a source that shows otherwise, please share.

5 Million was for ad buys on TV. The rest was just for support staff that actually were not employees of CA.

The Wired article says the rest went to "Oczkowski and his team". Oczkowski is CA's former head of product and worked there until April 2017.

Either way, I'm not sure the distinction you're making is very significant?

The statement that the stolen data was used for the campaign is contradicted by the interview link provided.

Ah, I see what you mean, yes: it's denied by the campaign manager.

In the immortal words of Mandy Rice-Davies, well, he would say that, wouldn’t he?

That's the evidence? Just because you want to believe it does not make it true.

I think the evidence is circumstantial but sufficient to warrant further investigation. CA harvested illegal data, used it in the Cruz campaign, lied about removing it and were then very involved in the presidential election, all within the span of a couple of years.

Parscape's denial is not in itself evidence, but I do agree with rsynnott that it's neither here nor there.

Specifically "which infamously used stolen Facebook data to target voters for President Donald Trump’s campaign in the 2016 U.S. election" from the article is inaccurate.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com