Why Facebook is in a hole over data mining | John Naughton
Its Mark Zuckerbergs business model that allows Facebook to be manipulated by political activists no wonder hes in denial about it
One of my favourite books is The Education of Henry Adams (published in 1918). Its an extended meditation, written in old age by a scion of one of Bostons elite families, on how the world had changed in his lifetime, and how his formal education had not prepared him for the events through which he had lived. This education had been grounded in the classics, history and literature, and had rendered him incapable, he said, of dealing with the impact of science and technology.
Re-reading Adams recently left me with the thought that there is now an opening for a similar book, The Education of Mark Zuckerberg. It would have an analogous theme, namely how the heros education rendered him incapable of understanding the world into which he was born. For although he was supposed to be majoring in psychology at Harvard, the young Zuckerberg mostly took computer science classes until he started Facebook and dropped out. And it turns out that this half-baked education has left him bewildered and rudderless in a culturally complex and politically polarised world.
What is intriguing about the Facebook founder is his astonishing blend of high intelligence, naivety and hubris. In February, when it finally began to dawn on him that the election of Donald Trump might tell us something significant and disturbing about the state of the US society, he wrote a lengthy epistle to his 86 million disciples.
Today, it began, I want to focus on the most important question of all: are we building the world we all want? Ponder that for a moment: note the imperial, hubristic we and the implicit assumption that it is possible to build a single world that everyone wants. It comes straight out of the Ladybird book of democracy. The epistle continues in the same vein. Progress now requires humanity coming together, not just as cities or nations, but also as a global community. And of course Facebook would provide just such a community: after all, it already has more than 2billion users, which is significantly more people than there are in China.
When it began to dawn on people that the powerful ad-targeting machine that Zuckerberg and his associates had built might also have been used to nudge voters towards Trump and away from Clinton, Zuckerbergs response was a mixture of denial and incredulity. Then, as the evidence mounted that his machine had indeed been weaponised by political actors to send so-called dark posts to individual users, he pivoted rapidly from incredulity to scepticism and then as the evidence became incontrovertible to technocratic determination to solve the problem. In between, he took consolation from the fact that since everyone was now angry with Facebook, the company must be doing something right. Trump says Facebook is against him, he wrote. Liberals say we helped Trump. Both sides are upset about ideas and content they dont like. Thats what running a platform for all ideas lookslike.
Given the ineptitude of his response to the crisis, Zuckerberg makes Theresa May look like Einstein. And therein lies a puzzle. For we know that the lad isnt stupid. Why then is he apparently behaving like an idiot? The answer is that he cannot come clean about the root of the problem, because to do so would reveal the unpalatable truth that its a product of Facebooks business model.
Facebook, like Google, is an extractive company, rather like ExxonMobil or Glencore. It mines, refines, aggregates and sells its users personal information and data trails to advertisers, who then use it to target ads at said users. This data is clearly valuable. At the moment, for example, the company earns nearly $20 per user per year (in the US and Canada, anyway) by monetising their data. The downside from societys point of view is that the targeted system that delivers these revenues is easily manipulated by political actors as we saw from the way Russian interests used it in the 2016 election.
Given the largesse that flows from this golden goose, you can see why Zuckerberg is reluctant to do or say anything that might threaten it. Thats why theres no discussion about alternative business models that might enable the company to survive without undermining democratic processes. One could, for example, imagine an honest business model in which people paid an annual subscription for a service that did not rely on targeting people on the basis of the 98data-points that the company holds on every user. All it would need is for Facebook users to fork out $20 a year for the pleasure of sharing LOLcats with one another.
Whats the likelihood of that happening? You know the answer. Which is why Zuck will continue to keep mum about the sordid reality underpinning his money machine.
- On Saturday he will mark his “One Year Campaversary” with a special gathering of family0 Shares
- Image copyright Getty Images ‘Not right’ Zoe Oakley, a bus driver and mother of two from0 Shares
- (CNN)As many as 15 activists protesting the Senate’s GOP health care bill were arrested Friday0 Shares
- (CNN)In the United States, teen-aged moms are increasingly rare. In 2016, the teen birth rate droppe0 Shares
- Officers body cameras were not turned on, state officials reveal, as stepson says: My mum was shot f0 Shares
- Experts suggest patients should stop taking the drugs when they feel better rather than completing t0 Shares
- Having type 1 or 2 diabetes requires a person to always know what their blood sugar levels are. This0 Shares
- But, Monal Zeidan said his 23-year-old son was a “shattered boy” and was “sufferin0 Shares
- 0 Shares
- Media playback is unsupported on your device Media captionSir Terry’s office has been reproduc0 Shares
Most Shared Posts
- THIS Woman Allegedly Cooked Her Chihuahua To Death In An Oven Because She Thought Her Ex Was INSIDE The Animal
- Genes found for deadly heart condition
- What too much alcohol can do to your health
- Dont Use Or Ingest Ginger If You Have Any of These Four Conditions
- Why are the poor blamed and shamed for their deaths?