Anita's Angle: Facebook and the 'post-truth' era

This past week, Facebook’s market value dropped by $58 billion as it was revealed that the data of 50 million users was wrongfully obtained and misused by the political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica. Although Facebook has had many scrapes with the laws on privacy, including a consent decree with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in 2011, this recent event represents perhaps the most brazen violation of privacy concerns. The scandal becomes even more concerning when one considers the threat such a breach poses to democracy itself — proven by the fact that Cambridge Analytica is a political consulting firm that has sought to influence elections around the globe. While it is impossible to discern the impact of this specific breach on the U.S. election outcome, the violation of the principles of our democracy must alarm all citizens.

Privacy, the distortion of truth and the sanctity of democratic elections are all critical concerns that have risen to the surface as a consequence of a nexus between Facebook and Cambridge Analytica.  In terms of privacy, Edward W. Felten, a professor of computer science and public affairs at Princeton University, believes that the case for government action “is strongest if Facebook ... violates its own privacy policy or its promises to users, which it appears to have done recently.” He points out that the current“notice-and-consent”model that requires users to read through lengthy, convoluted privacy policies before consenting to the use of their data, is inefficient, but may be our best regulatory option given the rapid evolution of online services. It is particularly vexing because the government did indeed try to caution Facebook about its fast and loose privacy approach when it was discovered that the company “deceived consumers by telling them they could keep their information on Facebook private, and then repeatedly allowing it to be shared and made public,” according to an FTC Press release dated Nov. 29, 2011. In response to the settlement, Jon Leibovitz, then-chairman of the FTC, said that the company is “obligated to keep the promises about privacy that it makes to its hundreds of millions of users.” Unfortunately, in just a few years after the agreement, the company seems to have chosen to blatantly disregard its commitment. We have to wonder whether the assurance of privacy is nothing more than a fig leaf that lulls us into complacency. It seems that we should use these platforms at our own risk — in other words, if you’re really worried, #DeleteFacebook.

The concerns about the distortion of truth and sanctity of democratic elections are a bit more difficult to resolve, because they strike at the heart of our political system. As technology becomes more sophisticated, “fake news” can evolve from fabricated articles to doctored audio and videos clips and deepfakes, realistic videos made using artificial intelligence software. These methods of digital manipulation, coupled with easy access to target billions of people now provided by major social media platforms, could pose a real national security threat, especially if a fake video was unverifiable. Platforms, Facebook included, certainly don’t have an unbiased incentive to ensure that citizens in a democracy receive only verified information. They just want to sell as many ads as possible, leaving the ideological concerns up to the public sector.