March 21, 2018

Those who cannot believe Trump won the election need a scapegoat and that scapegoat is Mark Zuckerberg.

"The election of Donald Trump was so shocking — and damaging to the country — that many people went looking for a scapegoat.... By spreading false news stories and giving a megaphone to Russian trolls, Facebook — a vastly larger social network than Twitter — played a meaningful role in the presidential campaign. Of course, so did many other suspects on the list. There was no single factor that allowed Trump to win. It was a confluence.... 'Where is Mark Zuckerberg?' asks Recode’s Kurt Wagner..... 'It’s time' for Zuckerberg and other top Facebook officials 'to come and testify,' Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said yesterday...."

From "Facebook Doesn’t Get It" by David Leonhardt in the NYT.

One billionaire seems indestructible, so let's get the other one.

UPDATE: Zuckerberg speaks. Excerpt:
I started Facebook, and at the end of the day I'm responsible for what happens on our platform. I'm serious about doing what it takes to protect our community. While this specific issue involving Cambridge Analytica should no longer happen with new apps today, that doesn't change what happened in the past. We will learn from this experience to secure our platform further and make our community safer for everyone going forward.

I want to thank all of you who continue to believe in our mission and work to build this community together. I know it takes longer to fix all these issues than we'd like, but I promise you we'll work through this and build a better service over the long term.
I want to thank all of you who continue to believe in our mission and work to build this community together... you credulous souls. Why should people believe in a "mission" or that there is one shared mission between users and the people who use them?

140 comments:

JohnAnnArbor said...

and damaging to the country

Hmm?

Michael K said...

The snake is eating its tail.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

There was no single factor that allowed Trump to win

Yeah, there was a single factor. It's called Hillary Clinton.

dreams said...

The liberals thought it was so smart and innovative when Obama used Facebook data.

Big Mike said...

@dreams, +1

buwaya said...

Amazing.
Do I sympathize with Zuckerberg for being criticized on such absurd grounds?
No, not really.
But its still absurd.

LYNNDH said...

I really do not think that the average (if there is such a person) person is much of a Facebook user.

MadisonMan said...

When will the Tantrum stop. Well, according to Feingold, when "we" win.

Fernandistein said...

played a meaningful role in the presidential campaign

The NYT's weaponized fake news trolls are targeting me and manipulating me into believing that and I'm helpless.

Nonapod said...

Zuckerberg didn't consciously go against the tribe with malice aforethought. He was a good progessive in 2012, feeding the Obama campaign all sorts of relevant user data. One would think that should count for something...

But the left is enraged and someone needs to pay, damnit! How dare he allow this to happen! The gatekeeper fell asleep and mean old Trump people got ahold of precious data. It's an unforgivable mistake.

tim in vermont said...

Damaging to liberals' need for power and control, not the country.

YoungHegelian said...

At least, in the bad ol' days, billionaires had enough sense to know that the Left was not their friends. I guess when your opponents use terms like "Proletarian Class Consciousness" & "Dictatorship of the Proletariat" it's obvious to even the most soft-hearted Captain of Industry/Robber Baron what side your bread's buttered on.**

Nowadays, lefties don't use such open terms of class warfare as much. Well, at least in public. Nowadays, your average Silicon Valley billionaire thinks that if he apes the Party Line on women, gays, minorities, yadda, yadda, he'll get invited to all the best parties, & no one will ever look at him and think "Wow! Just think of what we could do if we expropriated his billions to the struggling masses!".

Standing on the outside, it's really amazing how stupid these SV Robber Barons look. I mean, who came up with such a brilliant corporate strategy that consisted of work the corporation into monopoly status, give tons of money to the side that hates big corporations, & then do your damnedest to piss off the other side that defends big corporations. How was that going to work out, like, ever? Did these guys think they were going to "buy out" the Democratic constituencies. Hell, ever they don't have that much money!

** Yes, yes, I know even back then there were industrialists who supported the Marxist Left, e.g. Frederick Engels.

Chuck said...

This is such a ridiculous story.

Before anybody loads me up with a whole lot of stuff I don't care to know about Facebook, explain exactly how it is that anything that has anything to do with Facebook data actually swung the election outcome. Tell me precisely how it influenced votes. Wrongly influenced votes. Yes it is undoubtedly true; if Hillary won the election by a whisker the way Trump did, and if Breitbart was running stories about how the Hillary campaign had wrongly used Facebook data to swing the election, the whole world would be laughing at Breitbart.

What bullshit.

I hate this story; it risks making me sympathetic to Trump.

traditionalguy said...

Zuke had his sudden fame and a gift of instant wealth, but it has come crashing down now. As will Twitter and Google. We need to have a moment of silence for them, and then forget them.

A lot of power has suddenly crashed down of late. The Saudis have morphed into actual innocent friends of both Little Satan Israel and Big Satan America. The ICBM rattling monster with his own Thermonuclear warheads announcing our death has morphed into a puppy coming to visit its master. And our economy has left the Obama death spiral and entered into 5% GDP growth while the USA just became owners of the biggest oil and gas reserves on the planet and now exports the stuff.

But maybe Zuckerberg is to blame.


Bob Boyd said...

Hey Zuck, guess what? They're not going to eat you last after all.

Hagar said...

Zuckerberg invented a better mousetrap and made a fortune, but that is it. He is no evil genius nor a benevolent one, but just a young man who invented a better mousetrap.

n.n said...

Another disenfranchised Democrat. Why is he still viable?

Kevin said...

They told me that if Trump became president, people would scapegoat Jews, and they were right!

Unknown said...

Scapegoat is right, and it makes them all feel better. They just haven't reached the acceptance stage yet. Trump won, Hillary lost. Facebook and Google and Twitter and Russians and the FBI and on and on, played a very small part, if any, in his victory.

-sw

Amadeus 48 said...

Chuck--You are spot on.

This is such trash. People that supported Hillary cheered the rafters down, and booed Trump with or without Facebook. People who hated Hillary lapped up every story, true or false, that marred or mocked her. People who hated Trump (ahem, Ch___) didn't need Facebook. People who loved Trump didn't need Facebook, either.

Facebook has some real effects as a media company, but they mostly apply to people who are trying to monetize their internet presence.

The crowning glory of this story is the proposition (if true) that the RNC's GOTV materials were much better than the crap that Cambridge Analytics (motto: Over Promise, Under Deliver) scraped off its shoe after a stroll through Facebook, and the Trump campaign at the end relied solely on the RNC data. Why doesn't the NYT pursue that one?

The Germans Have A Word For That. said...

"Those who cannot believe Trump won the election need a scapegoat and that scapegoat is Mark Zuckerberg."

Well, that should be obvious.

The name Zuckerberg sounds Jewish.

And you need a scapegoat.

Historically, these two things go together like chocolate and peanut butter.

So I ask Google:

"are reese's peanut butter cups kosher?"

And the answer is:

"Reese's Peanut Butter Cups carry the "OU" mark (a U inside of a circle), which stands for the Kosher certification of the Orthodox Union...

Technically, the actual mark on Reese's is OU-D, which means that they contain milk products (dairy). Observant followers of the Kosher laws do not mix dairy and meat products at the same meal. But that has nothing to do with being Kosher; it's just more info for those who are concerned about the dairy vs. meat issue. Reese's Cups are certified to meet the cleanliness requirements and other standards to be Kosher..."

So don't eat meat along with your Reeses Peanut Butter Cups.

And especially avoid Reeses Peanut-Butter-and-Pork-Cutlet Cups.

Oh yeah:

Hillary and Presidential elections go together like Vodka and Ass.

The Germans have a name for this.

Virgil Hilts said...

Why is this such a big story compared to the Google is truly evil story from 10 days ago --
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/10/opinion/sunday/youtube-politics-radical.html

I think Google driving visitors to more extreme content is the most disgusting thing a social media company has done, and it probably has caused harm.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Facebook tricked voters against the proper love and adoration that belongs to poor Hillary.

Sebastian said...

"that scapegoat is Mark Zuckerberg." So it wasn't Putin?

Jim at said...

The left is desperate to find someone - anyone - other than the actual person who cost them the election ... Hillary Clinton.

Earnest Prole said...

Burn the witch.

Phil 3:14 said...

“The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves.”

tcrosse said...

Why should they care that Hillary lost, since we are being assured that she is irrelevant, and only stupid conservatives care about H>er ?

JSF said...

Silicon Valley chose to side with Democrats over a "neutral" stance in politics (which would have given it leverage on multiple issues such as "Net Neutrality," and the FTC looking into Google/FB and Twitter monopolies later this year.

The whirlwind awaits Zuckerburg, with no friends on the Right.

I'll get my popcorn.

Original Mike said...

”It’s time' for Zuckerberg and other top Facebook officials 'to come and testify,' Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said yesterday...."

Has Warner done anything legislative this past year? Just curious.

exhelodrvr1 said...

Facebook activities were a meaningful contributor to Trump's victory? That's not what the studies have indicated.

Jupiter said...

Jesus, Chuck is on a roll this week.

The really interesting aspect of all this bullshit is the assumption on the part of the Lefties that elections are won or lost, not by advocating the best policies and making the best arguments in favor of them, but by sneaky tricks and dirty dealings. I wonder where they got that idea.

Bob Boyd said...

Zuckabug will be lucky if Biden doesn't take him out behind the gym.

chuck said...

> There was no single factor that allowed Trump to win.

Bull$hit, there was Hillary.

I suppose the left attacking the left should make me happy, but it doesn't. It is all bad, the lunacy, the mob mentality, the need to blame, it is all disgusting.

AJ Lynch said...

What Chuck said at 3:21PM.

I will add what pussies we Americans have become when we regularly seek to blame someone else for our misfortunes, election results, etc.

The Germans Have A Word For That. said...

"I hate this story; it risks making me sympathetic to Trump."

Chuck, THAT was funny.

The Chuck who makes these kind of dry quips: THAT is the Chuck I want to party with.

The Germans have a word for this.

rehajm said...

As has been pointed out before lefties spent over a billion on ads but they were outfoxed by a few thousand dollars of Facebook ads...

Curious George said...

"Chuck said...
blah blah blah....if Hillary won the election by a landslide the way Trump did...blah blah blah blah blah"

FIFY Cuck.

JPS said...

Chuck, 2:35:

"explain exactly how it is that anything that has anything to do with Facebook data actually swung the election outcome."

Well it doesn't look like Russian Collusion is going to wash, so this is Plan B.

Rigelsen said...

This is such a ridiculous story.

Before anybody loads me up with a whole lot of stuff I don't care to know about Facebook, explain exactly how it is that anything that has anything to do with Facebook data actually swung the election outcome.


At least no one is calling for a special prosecutor. The thing is, to those of us without an ax to grind, the Russian “collusion” criminal referral, without an established crime, looks exactly the same way.

That said, the specific election nexus for this story may be ridiculous, but Facebook’s larger role in the destruction of political heterodoxy is anything but. That, along with its utter disregard for privacy of the stock whose data it milks for sale.

JPS said...

Rigelsen,

"Facebook’s larger role in the destruction of political heterodoxy is anything but [ridiculous]."

Damn straight.

Jimmy said...

I can just see Mueller extending his probe to explore possible collusion with the Russians by Zuckerberg et al.

This is all so tragicomic. And a bit surprising, because usually it's the Republicans with the circular firing squads.

Etienne said...

I'm serious about doing what it takes to protect our community.

I wonder what he means by "protect".

I mean, it's a directed advertising platform that collects user responses to marketing. How can you protect anyone so stupid as to invite a traveling salesman into their home, and let them take pictures of all your shit.

Bob Boyd said...

What is "our mission" anyway? He doesn't say.

gilbar said...

Zuckerburg talks about Facebook's "mission"
what mission would that be?
Oh right, According to The Harvard Crimson, the site was comparable to Hot or Not and used "photos compiled from the online facebooks of nine Houses, placing two next to each other at a time and asking users to choose the "hotter" person"

of course, before That, it was used to compare co-eds with farm animals

Kevin said...

The list of reasons Hillary lost which does not include Hillary continues to grow even in the second year of Trump's presidency.

I can't wait for the sequel to her book - Wait, Here's What Really Happened! - and the resulting book tour in 2019/2020.

Kevin said...

I wonder what he means by "protect".

I wonder what he means by "community". Am I inside or outside the circle of Zuck?

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Democrats only.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Why should they care that Hillary lost, since we are being assured that she is irrelevant, and only stupid conservatives care about H>er ?

Exactly, Tcrosse

the Russian narrative must march forward for the common good... for poor Hillary!

Achilles said...

Cambridge Analytics is a piker compared to Palantir.

There are dozens of companies far worse than Cambridge.

Facebook is 0 in 5 years.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Shorter Zuckerberg: Please don't leave us, next time only Democrats will be allowed to farm, plumb and milk. Icky Russian bots will never be allowed to steal the election for Poot again!

Revenge for Hillary!

Achilles said...

Original Mike said...

”It’s time' for Zuckerberg and other top Facebook officials 'to come and testify,' Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said yesterday...."

Has Warner done anything legislative this past year? Just curious.

No. But he has committed conspiracy, perjury, and treason. Pretty soon people are going to find out who was really colluding with Russians. Like actually conspiring with and communicating with Russians to undermine democracy.

People who look the hardest for scapegoats are the ones facing jail time.

If there is any justice he wont be overlooked for indictment because he is a senator.

Unknown said...

We're on a Mission From God

Unknown said...

MOM Men On A Mission

Unknown said...

The Missionary Position

Unknown said...

Computers are the greatest surveillance tool ever.

Everything you do leaves tracks.

Achilles said...


Before anybody loads me up with a whole lot of stuff I don't care to know about Facebook, explain exactly how it is that anything that has anything to do with Facebook data actually swung the election outcome.

About 24% of news referrals of news that is read by Americans comes from facebook. About a quarter of all news is read because of a facebook placed ad/post.

And lately they changed their algorithms and are driving people right of center out of business.

Facebook is a cancer on a free society.

Humperdink said...

Zuckerdork said: "I want to thank all of you who continue to believe in our mission and work to build this community together.

Gag me with a fork. His initial mission was to make billions. Mission accomplished. His new mission, as a result of ticking off the commie-pinko lefties, will be to grovel on his belly and beg forgiveness. Maybe even write a book ..... It Takes A Community.

tcrosse said...

You can use this link to delete your Facebook account. Or maybe you'd prefer to read the Mission Statement first.

You're Welcome.

Martin said...

No mention of how Facebook let the Obama campaign mine their user data in 2012.

This cuts both ways and the issue is not the 2016 election, it is the user data that FB keeps and controls.

Of course, nobody cares about that or it would have been an issue before now.

So, we will probably base bad policy, even bad laws, on a bad understanding of the issues.

As usual.

Unknown said...

aggregated data provides a "network effect" growth curve

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_effect

shaped like an S, with hockey stick up front.

Facebook (and WhatsApp) grew at X^2 to flatten out when the world was conquered.

If Google and Facebook didn't compile profiles, someone else would fill the gap.

Data is the new oil.

"regulating" private (and voluntary) surveillance will not turn out like anyone hopes.

Although it might turn out like the Chinese hope:

see what they do with "social credit"

via local commissars monitoring the WeChat platform

rhhardin said...

PC rules in corporations.

Sebastian said...

Wait, so was it Facebook that swung the election or white women meekly submitting to their bullying husbands?

Unknown said...

> Facebook is a cancer on a free society.

Google makes them look like pikers.

Lets see what they have on you

search - what you look for, where you were, your device - and thus your interests and location at a given time
gmail - everything you ever typed in, including drafts, everything you received, any offhand comment
chrome - your web browsing history, every click
android - you location, your mail, your contacts, your purchases in wallet, your visit in maps, your text messages, who you contacted, what apps you have installed, every keystroke in google keyboard, all your photos

They have fleets of PHDs planning what to collect next and how to leverage it.

What does netflix know? everything you watch
Uber? where you went
Amazon? what you bought, what you looked at

This data is dangerous for you, since you likely did something that looks wrong in the court of public opinion

and the next things it to predict the masses by using the data of groups.

Hillary might have flopped using it because she is just a terrible politician

the effort to perfect analytics never ceases.

You can't opt out of this forever, without opting out of society.

Lewis Wetzel said...

If Zuckerberg was in charge, he would deport every American w/o a college degree and replace them with foreigners. Zuckerberg actually seems to believe that your duty, as an American, is to strive to make Mark Zuckerberg even wealthier.

rhhardin said...

Mission statements were always the mark of a failing corporation. Workers ridiculed them when they were issued. For some reason management never was aware of that.

The opening of a "Center of Excellence" is the final blow to watch out for.

n.n said...

What if time or momentum followed an Ouroboros path? What if it was neither linear nor progressive (i.e. monotonic)? Abortion rites are an ancient remedy. So are various forms of birth control (i.e. transhuman). Wars are predominantly waged for secular causes. And the Jew, once denied the Democrat nomination, will forever be the canary in the abortion chamber.

tcrosse said...

The opening of a "Center of Excellence" is the final blow to watch out for.

For my sins, I spent many years in the belly of the corporate beast. At one time we had a Vice President of Continuing Improvement. The man was a reptile. A few years later the company was swallowed by a worse one.

Angle-Dyne, Angelic Buzzard said...

AA: "The election of Donald Trump was so shocking — and damaging to the country — that many people went looking for a scapegoat.... By spreading false news stories and giving a megaphone to Russian trolls,

I saw what you did there with that ellipsis.

At least, I hope you did it on purpose, 'cause it was so nicely done that I didn't want to re-read the sentence or click over to the article and spoil the first-read effect.

Howard said...

Clearly, Zuckerberg is an anti-christ.

Earnest Prole said...

Why should people believe in a "mission" or that there is one shared mission between users and the people who use them?

There's always a shared mission between those who exchange things of value.

wildswan said...

I still say that Hillary's analytics missed the entire Trump vote and that shows that analytics have a limitation: they only answer the questions asked. Hillary's Question was "Mirror, mirror on the wall/ Who is fairest of them all." And analytics always answered "You are Hillary, you are". On the night of the election Democrats on the ground in Florida reported unexpected, bad results to Bill Clinton within 45 minutes of the polls closing and they said that the results probably indicated a disaster in the upper MidWest where the Florida voters originally came from. But for two more hours the data analytics people in Brooklyn told Hillary that their model was holding. See Shattered - the chapter on election night. How analytics missed is a question that's always interested me.

Lewis Wetzel said...

Chief Dan George, VP of "Endeavoring to Persevere."

Lewis Wetzel said...

How much do you suppose Trump's margin of victory would have been if he didn't have all the media against him? OMG 95% favorable coverage for Hillary (and Hillary outspending Trump 2:1) couldn't get her over the top. Ironically, the process the GOP used to nominate Trump was far more Democratic than the process the Democrats used to nominate Hillary. If they want to be a real political party & not a Bill & Hill fan club they need to can the "super delegate" nonsense.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Why should people believe in a "mission" or that there is one shared mission between users and the people who use them?

Because he's getting rich off of it. Insanely rich. A billionaire. I thought you Republican assholes believed that only by creating wealth for billionaires can we find any meaning anyway. That that's the #1 objective in life. Did that suddenly change?

Michael said...

TTR

As it happens I would guess that MZ is primarily sucking up the fragile and finite "wealth" of the progs. Just an observation of those who seem to think people give a shit about their lives on FB and their "ideas."

tcrosse said...

There's talk of the Democrats getting rid of super delegates, presumably to prevent another Hillary. But they started it in the first place to prevent another McGovern.

tcrosse said...

Republican or Democrat, an asshole billionaire is still an asshole who happens to have a lot of money.

Humperdink said...

"Clearly, Zuckerberg is an anti-christ."

Nope, just another rich lib telling the rest of us cretins how to live our lives.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

Angle-Dyne, Angelic Buzzard said...
I saw what you did there with that ellipsis.


For a writer whose main claim for a role in the public forum is critiquing the perfidy of the New York Times, it would seem it would be best to do this honestly or hurt one's own credibility. YMMV.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

TTR

As it happens I would guess that MZ is primarily sucking up the fragile and finite "wealth" of the progs. Just an observation of those who seem to think people give a shit about their lives on FB and their "ideas."


What are you fucking talking about. His revenue comes from advertisers and his company's users are as diverse as America's and the world's. They can only be said to be "progressive" in the sense that most of America and the world is progressive - Republican power grabs in states and their districting processes notwithstanding. For an investor you sound pretty dumb. Do you have a broker that you need to hire out to make your calls?

tim in vermont said...

Hillary Clinton continues to attack President Trump while abroad, this time during an interview with a Dutch news network. During the interview, which took place on March 13, Clinton alleged that Trump is undermining the presidency in exchange for personal and familial gain. “He has undermined the office and used it to enrich himself and his family,” Clinton said. “Disregarded laws, ethical standards.” “He’s crossed into a territory of behavior and actions that are unpredictable, that are erratic, that are undermining the stability of the global order,”

This has to be something from The Onion. No way is she this completely lacking in self-awareness. She needs some time at the funny farm.

Gospace said...

The following never grows old:

ME: * laughing uncontrollably*

DEM: ... this isn't a joke.

ME (still laughing): I'm sorry, I'm sorry... it sounded like you said 13 Russians speaking broken English had a more effective messaging campaign than Hillary Clinton.

Michael K said...

It's amusing to see the haters freaking out.

I just wonder how much the Horowitz report and the subsequent prosecutions will have on the elections ?

readering said...

Ross Douthat has a good column today. zucker had a lot more to do with '16 outcome than Zuckerberg.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

Michael K said...
I just wonder how much the Horowitz report and the subsequent prosecutions will have on the elections ?


If you think it will have an effect then the smart money is on no effect.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

readering said...
Ross Douthat has a good column today.


Hadn't seen this, thanks. Douthat is interesting these days because he hates everyone, including the Pope. He used to be a bit bland but now he's letting his misanthropy freak flag fly high.

Bay Area Guy said...

NYT:

"The election of Donald Trump was so shocking — and damaging to the country — that many people went looking for a scapegoat.... By spreading false news stories and giving a megaphone to Russian trolls, Facebook — a vastly larger social network than Twitter — played a meaningful role in the presidential campaign."

What he meant to say:

"The election of Donald Trump was so shocking — and damaging to OUR PSYCHE — that many LEFTWING HILLARY SUPPORTERS went looking for a scapegoat.... By spreading false news stories and giving a megaphone to Russian trolls, Facebook — a vastly larger social network than Twitter — played a meaningful role in OUR EFFORTS TO ELECT HILLARY AND THWART TRUMP.

Henry said...

By spreading false news stories and giving a megaphone to Russian trolls, Facebook ... played a meaningful role in the presidential campaign

Beware! Beware the invisible trolls! Beware the invisible trolls and their tiny megaphone!

Snip, snap, snout.
This tale's told out.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Lol. Yeah, I can imagine that all the conservative reluctant Trumpkinses are likely to become quite misanthropic by where history's at now. Especially the Catholics. The Evangelicals don't mind giving Trump a pass. Many conservative Catholics hate the current pope. He's making Marxism seem more Christian than capitalism! I guess he never read the part of the New Testament that extols greed as a prime virtue while seeking a moral scoundrel in the secular leader.

Henry said...

Next up: Democrats blame a guy named Blaine for sharing Russian memes. It was Blaine! Hillary lost because of Blaine!

Rabel said...

If you want to read the stories Althouse linked from the NYT and Recode, you can click the little "f" icon on the pages she linked and use your Facebook login to read them on Facebook.

This will give your Facebook data to the Times and Recode but thanks to Zuckerberg's new policies it won't give them your Facebook friends' data, unless you allow it.

And under an older Facebook policy, they can't resell that data to a third party such as Cambridge Analytica because that would be a policy violation.

I'm positive that no one from the sprawling, billion dollar Obama or Clinton operations ever did that because it would be a policy violation.

Humperdink said...

"Next up: Democrats blame a guy named Blaine for sharing Russian memes. It was Blaine! Hillary lost because of Blaine!'

Recall Obama blamed Booosh for 8 years for every malady in US. Hillary has a veritable smorgasboard of people, countries, medical issues, primary opponents, right wing media types, and a wayward spouse to lay blame on. And seven (7) years left to do it.

Lucien said...

Chuck takes more than his fair share of grief in these comments and keeps coming back, so it’s only fair to give him credit for his position on this entry. (Most of the time I disagree with him, but I stay away from the ad hominem “LLR” stuff.)

Seeing Red said...

They have fleets of PHDs planning what to collect next and how to leverage it.

What does netflix know? everything you watch
Uber? where you went
Amazon? what you bought, what you looked at

This data is dangerous for you, since you likely did something that looks wrong in the court of public opinion



China is setting up rules for those who break the social contract.

Can’t fly or ride a bus. One would be for smoking in a train.

It’s better than what Mao did. He’d kill you. My dad told me that’s how China stopped people defacating in the street.

Henry said...

There is a kind of "who lost Vietnam" scent in the Democratic boudoir.

I think this Jules Feiffer cartoon could be repurposed:

Who Lost Hillary the Election?

"Not I" said Debbie Wasserman Schultz, "I just sent money."

"Not I" said Hillary, "I just hired advisors."

"Not I" said Robbie Mook, "I just followed the analytics."

"Not I" said James Comey, "What was the question?"

YOU lost Hillary Clinton the election," said the New York Times, "Because you didn't trust your leaders."

Seeing Red said...

Why r u surprised about the Pope, TR? He was steeped in 70s Marxist Revolutionary Theory that swept the Americas.

When he starts selling off the Church’s assets let me know.

The tax exempt always want you to come up with the bread.

Chuck said...

I’m honestly glad that people were so receptive to my comment.

I just want to be clear on a lesser point; when I say, “This story is such bullshit,” I don’t mean that Althouse’s blogpost was b.s.; it isn’t! (Or a even, what they did, that broke a single provision of 10,000 pages of FEC code...)

The bullshit is the fact that no one can say what Cambridge Analytica did, that actually moved a single vote.

Althouse’s post was fine, of course.

Michael K said...

Michael K said...
I just wonder how much the Horowitz report and the subsequent prosecutions will have on the elections ?

If you think it will have an effect then the smart money is on no effect.


I guess you thought that was amusing. Let's talk after November.

Gahrie said...

Hillary Clinton continues to attack President Trump while abroad, this time during an interview with a Dutch news network. During the interview, which took place on March 13, Clinton alleged that Trump is undermining the presidency in exchange for personal and familial gain. “He has undermined the office and used it to enrich himself and his family,” Clinton said. “Disregarded laws, ethical standards.” “He’s crossed into a territory of behavior and actions that are unpredictable, that are erratic, that are undermining the stability of the global order,”

This has to be something from The Onion. No way is she this completely lacking in self-awareness. She needs some time at the funny farm.


It's simple projection. She knows how she would be behaving if she had won the election and is simply assuming that Trump is doing the same.

mikesixes said...

2012:Obama's the smartest,coolest, hippest guy ever for using sophisticated data analytics to Target his advertising and gotv efforts! What a brilliant use of the product that Google and Facebook were founded to provide!
2016:Data analytics are the work of the devil! Burn Zuckerberg at the stake for selling the data we gave him to sell!

Luke Lea said...

http://thehill.com/opinion/technology/379245-whats-genius-for-obama-is-scandal-when-it-comes-to-trump

Henry said...

I forgot one "Not I" -- the LBJ:

"Not I," said Bill, "I just followed Hillary.

Michael said...


TTR
"They can only be said to be "progressive" in the sense that most of America and the world is progressive -"

Nope. You are a lap behind. This is nonsense on stilts. The prog movement is on its last legs. Only fools and wannabe hipsters are buying this shit.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

He has undermined the office and used it to enrich himself and his family,” Clinton said


F]]] OFF HILLARY. THEN GO DIE. The Queen of personal enrichment speaks. Trump doens't get paid to be president and in fact has probably taken a bath with is personal finances.

Hillary really is a bitch from hell.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

The GOP better use Hillary to the hilt in every 2018 election.

SH said...

Funny; he picked up the Hillary fake news meme to help delegitimize Trump's win. Promising to do more to stop it since Facebook was involved. It was part of and/or became part of the Russian ad buy meme. He helped start the movement going after him now. Karma.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

I want her to run in 2020 so Trump can beat the holy living shit out of her one more time.

Run bitch, run. You foul wicked horrid money-grubbing money whore.

**

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Fire Sessions. find someone to open the never-ending Clinton Crime Family investigation and find who killed Seth Rich.

Hagar said...

Zuckerberg may not be competent to run Facebook, but then, who is?

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Nope. You are a lap behind. This is nonsense on stilts. The prog movement is on its last legs. Only fools and wannabe hipsters are buying this shit.

So says the so-called investment banker who's too ignorant to know the revenue model of the world's largest social media company with over 2 billion users.

So your bullshit phony opinion on whether more Americans want to allow the market to price them out of health insurance, outsource gun policy to the NRA, or have their environmental policy run by the oil companies is not hard to dismiss.

Micha Elyi said...

Zuckerberg didn't consciously go against the tribe with malice aforethought. He was a good progessive in 2012, feeding the Obama campaign all sorts of relevant user data. One would think that should count for something...

But the left is enraged and someone needs to pay, damnit! How dare he allow this to happen! The gatekeeper fell asleep and mean old Trump people got ahold of precious data. It's an unforgivable mistake.

--Nonapod (2:28 PM)

The Left's agents in the Congress are sharpening their knives. Additional motives for the Left's piling-on of Zuckerberg and Facebook is the prospect of forcing a break-up of a very big business (by stock market valuation) and dining on some fat, juicy hunks of tax revenue.

Lewis Wetzel said...

If I ever looked in the mirror & saw Zuckerberg's face I'd cut my own throat.
Zuckerberg. Don't like 'em. Never liked him. Never will like him. (spits)

Lewis Wetzel said...

Blogger Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

I want her to run in 2020 so Trump can beat the holy living shit out of her one more time.


The sekrit Dem plan for 2020 is to spend four times as much as Trump instead of just twice as much, and to actually campaign in states they need to win. Also, that internet guy who designed Groupon's algorithm that tells me that I can get thirteen donuts for the price of twelve if I can drive 200 miles in fifteen minutes? They're going to hire him, and all of friends that can speak English and don't look too foreign.

Achilles said...

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Because he's getting rich off of it. Insanely rich. A billionaire. I thought you Republican assholes believed that only by creating wealth for billionaires can we find any meaning anyway. That that's the #1 objective in life. Did that suddenly change?

It was never true.

You made it up because you don't like to argue with people. You like to argue with straw men. People tend to make arguments you can't counter or deal with.

Achilles said...

Chuck said...

The bullshit is the fact that no one can say what Cambridge Analytica did, that actually moved a single vote.

Cambridge Analytica gathered personal information and used it to target adds to people who would be more receptive.

That isn't the issue. The issue is they gathered information from people who did not consent. Dozens of companies use similar tactics.

Additionally the Facebook revenue stream is derived from the sale of personal information and targeting adds and referrals/traffic. The decision to allow these numerous firms to scrape user information boosted their revenues because the companies paid for the adds and the traffic.

There are all sorts of ways to boost your revenues. Facebook made a choice to allow other companies to abuse their system and break user confidentiality. The press and all of the lefties were celebrating how brilliant the Obama campaign was in 2012 for using information illegally scraped from user accounts on social media.

Beyond that Facebook has a monopoly for all intents and purposes and they abuse this position copying competitors and driving competition out of business. We don't even need to get into the sucking up to China stuff.

If you want to have some fun go look up Palantir. They make Cambridge Analytica look tiny and cute.

Lewis Wetzel said...

Here's an interesting article abut who, exactly, are the 1%: https://www.economist.com/node/21543178
About a quarter are doctors or lawyers, e.g, they are highly skilled, highly paid workers. They tend to be Republicans, but not dramatically so, the ratio is about 33% GOP to 27% Democrat.

Achilles said...

Yes I know Google is worse than Facebook. They are currently abusing their monopoly position in many ways. Google is explicitly evil just like facebook.

Just like facebook Google has decided it is better morally/intellectually than their customers. Hubris always leads to a fall. Both seem large now. They will both fall.

Achilles said...

Lewis Wetzel said...
Here's an interesting article abut who, exactly, are the 1%: https://www.economist.com/node/21543178
About a quarter are doctors or lawyers, e.g, they are highly skilled, highly paid workers. They tend to be Republicans, but not dramatically so, the ratio is about 33% GOP to 27% Democrat.


The 1% isn't the problem.

It is the .001% that is the problem.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

You made it up because you don't like to argue with people.

True.

I like to argue with facts but since you never have any I basically just challenge you on why you think you're too good for the facts.

Lewis Wetzel said...

Let me give you some advice, TTR. As someone who loves you.
Facts are derived from the use of reason. No reason, no facts. Pay more attention to reason than to facts.

Yancey Ward said...

"I want to thank all of you who continue to believe in our mission and work to build this community together."

This basically tells you, Ann, everything you need to know. Read between the lines- the complaint was never that Facebook's platform allowed this sort of operation- the complaint was that it was done in service to a Republican candidate. Zuckerberg is reassuring the progressives that the company itself is still on their side, and that in future elections, the data will be used properly in electing a Democrat.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Wrong, dummy. Facts aren't derived from anything. They just exist and are there before anything even reason need be applied.

How it is that you're too dumb to even realize something so basic is incredible but there you have it. I guess this is why conservative Republicanism exists in America. A complete failure to even know what a fact is.

Lewis Wetzel said...

TTR, you might want to take a look at the word 'fact.' When it started to be used, what it was supposed to define. You sound like a community college guy. Not that there is anything wrong with that.
You aren't as smart as I am. But I love you anyway :)

Paul Ciotti said...

Rabel: "If you want to read the stories Althouse linked from the NYT and Recode, you can click the little "f" icon on the pages she linked and use your Facebook login to read them on Facebook."

Where exactly is this little "f"?

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

I'm not as dumb as you are. You seem to think you're a philosopher, but you're really a confused sophist. If someone hit you upside the head the act of them walloping your useless coconut would still be a "fact" regardless of whether or not you could perceive it, let alone reason out the fact that it occurred. If you smelled a rose, or if someone smelled the whiff of horse manure that pervades you, those facts would also exist without any reasons for why they smelled that way. It seems that what you have is a perception problem, and I wouldn't be surprised if it accounts for the defects in your political tribe generally. You're so unreasoned that it's messed with your understanding of reality, and warped your abilities even as they concern any basic ability to perceive things in the first place.

Is English your first language? I'm not convinced you actually even know how to speak it. Time to brush up on basic vocabulary.

Lewis Wetzel said...

The important thing to remember, TTR, is that I love you. Nothing else really matters, does it?

Lewis Wetzel said...

Look, copy the althouse link. Open an "anonymous" window in your browser. Paste the link. Click "go to" Okay?

YoungHegelian said...

@TTR,

Facts aren't derived from anything. They just exist and are there before anything even reason need be applied.

No. Just No. No school of epistemology holds this to be true. Do you think that objects that exist outside our intellects just kindly & gently impinge on it? Do you not "get" the idea that what's "out there" somehow gets in our heads as being a deeply problematic issue?

If you don't, you don't. But don't go calling other people "dumb" & "sophists" because they do.

Lewis Wetzel said...

Progressives are people who speak for the ineffable.

Big Mike said...

There’s a level at which this is so hilarious. Facebook is free for its users, but the company pays the salaries, benefits, and Social Security taxes for 25,000 full time employees and Zuckerberg himself is a billionaire. How do Facebook think he makes all that money if not from what they tell his company?

Kevin said...

If FB really wanted to clean up its act, it would come forward with every violation it knows about and finds. It would not let the appearance that Cambridge Analytics was the only company that did this stand, and it would not feed the left's fantasies that Trump's team did something truly unique.

If FB really wanted to clean up its act, it would discuss how its people and data have been used in political campaigns before and would put in place strict safeguards to ensure it never happens again.

This would include requiring as a condition of employment their employees not work with political campaigns given the sensitive nature of the data it holds.

But I suspect this will be the typical corporate mea culpa where just enough is being done to divert the cameras elsewhere.

MarkJ said...

"So your bullshit phony opinion on whether more Americans want to allow the market to price them out of health insurance, outsource gun policy to the NRA, or have their environmental policy run by the oil companies is not hard to dismiss."

Toothless, for the love of God get an enema. It'll make you feel better.

Big Mike said...

... how do Facebook users ...

I shouldn’t post a comment before my second cup of coffee.

BillyTalley said...

Scott Adams recently made a video about the Left’s need to find the next excuse for losing the election after the Russian one had crumbled out of sight. It’s a way to maintain their self conception. He used the metaphor of stalker deflection strategy.

sean foley said...

From what I remember this stuff was brilliant, genius and nothing but goodness when Obama was using it. The hypocrisy of our media is astounding. You cannot believe a word coming out of their mouths. This whole facebook think is nothing, literally nothing, there is nothing new, nothing unique, nothing dangerous. It is the same kind of voter research that campaigns have done for a century, and not only that, it's never as effective as people make it out to be, which is why the Trump campaign decided not to use this facebook garbage.

Real American said...

"and damaging to the country"

Do these idiots read this shit before they write it? They lost an election, not a war! The country is still here. A lot of people are doing better. Pretty much the main thing that has been damaged is the left's sense of self-worth, which, increasingly, is directly proportional to how much unaccountable authority they can wield over other people. Anyone who would write such a thing is a fucking hack. Disregard to your own benefit and sanity.

Rabel said...

Paul Ciotti asked:

"Where exactly is this little "f"?"

At the Times link it's near top of the page to the right of the byline. At the Recode link it's on the left just above the photo of Zuckerberg.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

No. Just No. No school of epistemology holds this to be true.

Yes, just yes. Facts don't need approval from a philosophy department for them to be perceived by anyone with the senses or instrumentation to notice them.

Do you think that objects that exist outside our intellects just kindly & gently impinge on it?

Most if not all objects exist outside our intellects and whether they "impinge" on it depends how schizophrenic or easily you fantasize and go to war against your basic perception apparatus so as to block out what the ears, eyes, nose, skin or tongue perceive.

Do you not "get" the idea that what's "out there" somehow gets in our heads as being a deeply problematic issue?

Only if you have a deep-seated hatred against the lived experience and basic visceral sensation.

If you don't, you don't. But don't go calling other people "dumb" & "sophists" because they do.

I do and I will. Get in touch with your body, ears and eyes, man. They won't kill you. Unless some arbitrary "authority" figure long ago convinced you that He would if you so much as perceived the wrong thing.

Humans for the most part cannot survive without their senses. The fact that you have so much contempt for them shows just how far from the basic survival toolkit you (and those you feel as you do) have crawled. No wonder conservatives love enticing an unstable polity and society. It's so hard for them to even feel alive otherwise. How sad.