Facebook's Secret Settlement On Cambridge Analytica Gags UK Data Watchdog (techcrunch.com) 25
An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: Remember the app audit Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg promised to carry out a little under three years ago at the height of the Cambridge Analytica scandal? Actually the tech giant is very keen that you don't. The UK's information commissioner just told a parliamentary subcommittee on online harms and disinformation that a secret arrangement between her office and Facebook prevents her from publicly answering whether or not Facebook contacted the ICO about completing a much-trumpeted 'app audit'. "I think I could answer that question with you and the committee in private," information commissioner Elizabeth Denham told questioner, Kevin Brennan, MP.
Pressed on responding, then and there, on the question of whether Facebook ever notified the regulator about completing the app audit -- with Brennan pointing out "after all it was a commitment Mark Zuckerberg gave in the public domain before a US Senate committee" -- Denham referred directly to a private arrangement with Facebook which she suggested prevented her from discussing such details in public. "It's part of an agreement that we struck with Facebook," she told the committee. "In terms of our litigation against Facebook. So there is an agreement that's not in the public domain and that's why I would prefer to discuss this in private."
Pressed on responding, then and there, on the question of whether Facebook ever notified the regulator about completing the app audit -- with Brennan pointing out "after all it was a commitment Mark Zuckerberg gave in the public domain before a US Senate committee" -- Denham referred directly to a private arrangement with Facebook which she suggested prevented her from discussing such details in public. "It's part of an agreement that we struck with Facebook," she told the committee. "In terms of our litigation against Facebook. So there is an agreement that's not in the public domain and that's why I would prefer to discuss this in private."
The question is... (Score:2, Troll)
...why would the commission agree on the privacy, unless forced to by UK gov?
Re:The question is... (Score:5, Insightful)
Policy and private contract should not trump existing law.
This is a dangerous precedent to set. All hail the corporate overlords who exert such power that they can cow governments into silence, even when the corporations are the ones accused of wrongdoing.
Strictly speaking ... (Score:2)
Contract law, doesn't trump statute law, so there must be something else going on. The only plausible explanation I can come up with is government pressure. The Tories benefit from this abuse and they are the ones in power.
Re: (Score:1)
Why would they do it because Facebook blocked the Workers Socialist Party in the UK, straight up in your face corruption and exactly what to expect in future.
Where did the buck stop? (Score:3)
Did the commissioner personally agree to the stipulation without running it by any higher-ups? Sounds like somebody was thoroughly out-negotiated by Facebook lawyers.
Re:Where did the buck stop? (Score:5, Informative)
Probably told to by the government. The Tories are in this up to their necks. Just today or emerged they had been illegally racially profiling voters. CA and Facebook delivered a lot for them.
https://www.theguardian.com/te... [theguardian.com]
Outrageous (Score:5, Informative)
The UK's Information Commissioner states for the record that the UK Conservative Party illegally racially profiled more than 10 million UK voters ahead of the UK's 2019 General Election... but then goes on to say that no enforcement action was necessary, because the party deleted the data after receiving a "recommendation" from said Information Commissioner.
Lesson Learned / Experience Gained:
1. Break the Law.
2. Use your illegal gains to help you win an election.
3. Get caught.
4. Say "Oops! Sorry!" and promise to delete the data.
5. The end.
No sanction, no investigation. No actual issue with breaking the law in the first place.
And politicians wonder why the public are losing faith in government?
Hint: it's because you're all a bunch of ####ing crooks!
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The problem with the UK is that there has never been much enforcement for standards in politics. Used to be that people would be obliged to resign but now even that is gone. There are no consequences at all.
The result of unprecedented corruption and incompetence. Tens of billions given to Tory pals, 100,000 dead and a brexit deal that is destroying the industries it was supposed to save. Zero resignations, zero prosecutions. Can't even have a public enquiry until the Tories decide it's okay to investigate t
Re: (Score:1)
Too right.
Us Brits are struggling under the Brexit regulations. Goods from Europe which are now supposed to be tariff free under the brexit agreement are now actually costing a lot more as UK Gov now demands 20% additional fee for entry into the UK and you are not finding out till the Delivery Courier asks you for a large wedge of cash before handing over your items.
People who receive gifts from family/friends in Europe are now having to stump up cash to receive their presents.
Something is going to have to
Re: (Score:2)
What's the saying, "Good ole boys don't check up on good ole boys to see if they're being good ole boys."
Re:Where did the buck stop? (Score:4, Interesting)
All The Guardian really have in that article is to say "The Conservatives had data that included race, religion and nationality.".
There's absolutely no reference to where this was collected, for what reason, or anything else.
In most data heavy organisations I know, there will be infractions of information governance. People believe they need information to obtain a valid context. However, the letter of the law can often disagree, and sometimes just include attributes because it's on every other form they have.
A simple copy paste of almost any government form has those attributes on it.
If there'd been a big fine associated with it and a court case (the ICO has no problem doing just that to whoever really gets naughty with data), then I'd say your assertion had more merit.
As it stands, I don't see any connection between them having that data, and a deliberate racial profiling, which you claim. Do you have clearer evidence for that?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Citations to the specific intent and use please. Stop being a partisan conspiracy theorist.
Have you ever worked in large scale government data? I have. Consolidation of data sets is pretty much usual everywhere.. Especially combining multiple sets to obtain a clearer picture.
As I stated, in any large organisation, you will get IG infractions. The specific ones with malicious intent (provable) get large ICO fines. That part didn't happen, so that would tend to indicate that it's a "Business as usual" in
So ... (Score:2)
So this is what taking back control [corporate-...tch.org.uk] looks like. It was not the people that took back control, it was the old school ties and their 1% puppet masters.
Re: (Score:2)
it was a commitment Mark Zuckerberg gave in the public domain before a US Senate committee
Jeezus, and people actually believed him? He's shown again and again and again and again and again that he'll just say whatever he needs to in front of inquiries/inquests and then walk away with no consequences each time. I mean, seriously, this isn't snark or anything, why would anyone still believe anything he says? You know he'll just say something in which it looks like he's taking responsibility, not do anything, and walk out the door again to keep doing what he's just said he'll stop doing.
Re: (Score:3)
Republicans? Democrats? I thought this article was about something happening in the UK...
More likely that inorder to get a settlement! (Score:2)
Remember we are talking about corruption involving Facebook and Partners, Cambridge and Others. Facebook is a big problem!
Re:More likely that inorder to get a settlement! (Score:4, Insightful)
So what was the settlement? Money? So the UK traded the truth for dollars? Facebook has plenty of dollars. What would serve the public good is transparency.
wtf agreement (Score:2)
Why does everyone make agreements that they will play nice with a large company when there is a criminal or civil investigation?
If they were investigating you or me they would just railroad us. Large companies they always play nice or agree to a low settlement for breaking the law.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Why does everyone make agreements that they will play nice with a large company when there is a criminal or civil investigation?
Because the public are largely an apathetic mass with a short memory.
Management of the situation is taken over by a PR team given all the resources they need to protect the reputation of the company as they work with the government until the whole thing blows over.
Then it's back to business as usual.
Re: (Score:2)
In the US it's called lobbying. In the UK, they probably haven't made it public knowledge since they still kind of pretend politics is about something other than money. At least that's the view we have over here, but I'm sure the process is the same. "Keep this quiet, we'll *COUGH*contribute to your campaign fund*COUGH*.