This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/live/2018/may/16/christopher-wylie-cambridge-analytica-testifies-us-senate-live

The article has changed 8 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 4 Version 5
Bannon wanted 'weapons for a culture war', says Cambridge Analytica whistleblower – live Bannon wanted 'weapons for a culture war', says Cambridge Analytica whistleblower – live
(35 minutes later)
And we’re done! Tillis closes out by entering articles about the Obama campaigns use of data into the record.
Tillis: We can talk about all the bad [social media platforms] have done, but I can also talk about the good they have done in crowdsourcing and preventing suicides.
Klobuchar on the Facebook algorithm: The message I’m getting is that if you want to do a moderate, policy based post, you better pay to promote it. But if you do something really partisan, it will get a lot of engagement.
Klobuchar is asking about the power of FB’s algorithms to suppress or promote speech.
Wylie: What you’re talking about is distortion in the information that is available to people. Notes that distortion in other areas, like the financial markets, is regulated.
Klobuchar: What do we know about the scope of Facebook’s data problem? How many more Cambridge Analyticas are out there?
Wylie: Only Facebook knows. He notes that Facebook threatened to sue the Guardian and banned him from the platform.
“We don’t require car companies to make unsafe cars and just put terms and conditions on the outside... We have rules that require safety and to put people first... In the 21st century it is nearly impossible for people to be functional without the use of the internet, so there should be some degree of accountability and oversight.”
Wylie: I never directly communicated with Facebook about that project until I left the company. My understanding is that Aleksandr Kogan did communicate with Facebook.
Blumenthal: In my questioning of Zuckerberg, I showed him the terms of service that showed Facebook was on notice of what Kogan was collecting.
Wylie: What I do know is that if you set up an app on FB, you have to submit the terms of service for review. So Facebook was notified, whether or not they bothered to read the terms and conditions, sort of like how many users don’t read the ToS, is another matter.
Blumenthal: Did CA provide “in kind” services to US candidates?
Wylie says not that he knows of, but that Mercer’s investment in the firm made it possible for CA to charge less for services than it would have.
Blumenthal is suggesting that this could be a non-disclosed campaign donation.
Wylie says this was an “ancillary benefit” of Mercer’s investments, such that his money could support CA’s clients without being reported as a donation.
Whitehouse is now asking about an individual who played a key role in connecting CA with BlackCube, and says she’s the same person who connected the Nigeria project and LeaveEU.
Wylie: The person you are referencing played a role in setting up the activity in Nigeria, which involved hacked material.
Whitehouse says this was Black Cube, the Israeli firm.
Wylie: She made introductions between a group of Israelis and SCL. Wylie says Whitehouse needs to ask CA about whether this was Black Cube.
Whitehouse is asking about the “overspending scheme” by one of the pro-Brexit campaigns, VoteLeave.
Whitehouse: Is it true that CA had zero role in the Brexit referendum?
Wylie: I don’t agree with that because AIQ was set up to service Cambridge Analytica and SCL. “AIQ was only set up to service SCL and Cambridge Analytica.” To say that CA didn’t have any role of infuence on Brexit is looking at it too narrowly.
And we’re back for a second round of questioning, starting with Senator Whitehouse, who is kicking us off by asking about Brexist and Aggregate IQ.
While we’re waiting for the hearing to recommence... the president of the European parliament just announced that Mark Zuckerberg has agreed to appear at a closed-door meeting with MEPs in Brussels.
This decision is likely to only further anger the UK parliament, which has repeatedly called on the CEO to appear. MPs have gone so far as to threaten Zuckerberg with issuing a formal summons, so if Zuckerberg does travel to Brussels next week, we imagine he won’t be flying through Heathrow.
We’re taking a quick recess so the senators can vote on something. But referring back to Kennedy’s point on censorship: Facebook can and does censor what you see on the platform. Some of this censorship occurs automatically, through algorithms that promote certain posts while hiding others, depending on the various signals that Facebook uses to rank News Feed posts. Other censorship is based on the content of posts, and Facebook has only recently begun to be more transparent about how it determines what content is and is not allowed.We’re taking a quick recess so the senators can vote on something. But referring back to Kennedy’s point on censorship: Facebook can and does censor what you see on the platform. Some of this censorship occurs automatically, through algorithms that promote certain posts while hiding others, depending on the various signals that Facebook uses to rank News Feed posts. Other censorship is based on the content of posts, and Facebook has only recently begun to be more transparent about how it determines what content is and is not allowed.
Hersh: We have a basic human response that we are attracted to provocation and extremism, and what the platforms are doing is promoting that attraction. It’s about what we want.Hersh: We have a basic human response that we are attracted to provocation and extremism, and what the platforms are doing is promoting that attraction. It’s about what we want.
Kennedy: “Here’s the problem, we can all agree that poison is being spread on social media. Here’s the tough part: define poison. I don’t want Facebook censoring what I see.”Kennedy: “Here’s the problem, we can all agree that poison is being spread on social media. Here’s the tough part: define poison. I don’t want Facebook censoring what I see.”
We’re returning to Senator Kennedy, who already asked questions earlier.
Kennedy: Did the Facebook co-founder share data with the Obama campaign that it didn’t share with the Romney campaign because he wanted Obama to win?
Jamison explains that this is not true. Chris Hughes was working for the Obama campaign. But he understood how Facebook worked and was able to teach the Obama campaign how to use it.
Booker: It was stunning to me that big data was used not to rally voters but to suppress voters? Was this a determined effort to suppress votes not just of African Americans or other groups?
Wylie: My understanding was that it was to suppress any group of voters that would go for Democracts, especially African Americans.
Booker: Was this about inflaming differences?
Wylie: The US went through a civil rights movement in an attempt to desegregate society. What we’re seeing now is a resegregation of society by algorithms. Some people call that echo chambers. CA was looking to exploit certain vulnerabilites in certain segments to send them information that will remove them from the public forum, and feed them conspiracies and they’ll never see mainstream media ... We have destroyed the public forum.
Wylie describes videos created by CA as “sadistic and Islamophobic”.
Corey Booker, Democrat from New Jersey, is raising the New York Times’ reporting on Facebook’s role in spreading violence and misinformation in Sri Lanka. He’s now quoting SCL’s Nigel Oakes speaking approvingly of Hitler’s propaganda tools.
Hirono is raising concerns about predictive technology that the government is seeking to do to forecast criminality.
Wylie points out that biased data produces biased results.
Senator Mazie Hirono, Democrat from Hawaii, addresses Hersh.
Hirono: If we were to consider regulating anything, should we focus on regulating ads or messages that demobilize people.
Hersh: I’ve worked for the ACLU on government voter suppression, but this is different. What’s the line for demobilization by a campaign? What if a campaign is just describing a candidate’s shortcomings? Is that demobilization?
Hirono: We’re talking about people paying to suppress votes? That’s different from someone just saying don’t vote for so-and-so.
Hirono seems to be suggesting that ads aimed at voter suppression could be regulated, but that seems highly questionable from a First Amendment point of view.
Durbin: Did you have any guidance from CA in terms of secrecy?
Wylie: Everybody had to sign a very thorough non-disclosure agreement.
Durbin: Alexander Nix was clearly involved in Cambridge Analytica.
Wylie: He was the CEO, so yes.
Durbin: Notes that federal law prohibits the direction of campaign work by foreigh nationals: “There is a red flag, or a red Union Jack.”
Senator Dick Durbin, Democrat from Illinois: I asked a question of Mr Zuckerberg, whether he felt comfortable telling me the name of the hotel that night, and after a couple seconds he said no. It really got to the heart of the issue about Mr Zuckerberg and his feelings about personal privacy and where he draws the line. The right of Facebook or any entity to use my information without my permission, I think is over the line. We have now put a little piece of electric tape over the camera on my laptop. People are watching.
Wylie: Good.
Harris: What should Facebook have done to ensure you deleted the data?
Wylie: In 2016, they sent me a letter that requested me to delete the data and sign a certification that I did it.
Harris: Did you need a notary?
Wylie: No notary or legal procedure. So I signed the notification and sent it back.