Introduction
The Cambridge Analytica scandal was a political scandal that involved the harvesting of millions of user data by a political consulting company, Cambridge Analytica. The event first came into the limelight in 2018 when two printing houses, the Guardian and the New York Times, released articles showing the breach. The articles reported that Cambridge Analytica used Facebook users’ data to create targeted marketing campaigns for Donald Trump (Confessore, 2018; Graham-Harrison & Cadwalladr, 2018). Facebook had a massive involvement in the Scandal since it allowed a third-party app to harvest the data without first informing the users how it would use the data (González, Yu, Figueroa, López, & Aragon, 2019).
This paper will provide a meta and longitudinal analysis of the Cambridge Analytica scandal by exploring the events leading up to the Scandal, that is, during and after. The paper will foster a better understanding of the issue by examining the timeline, data, technology, organization, and law perspectives and providing recommendations for Facebook, the industry, and society.
Background Review of the Scandal
Events Leading Up to the Scandal
The Cambridge Analytica scandal was preceded by a series of events that led to the breach of users’ data. One of the main preceding events was the development of the “thisisyourdigitallife,” a third-party app developed by Aleksandr Kogan, a Cambridge University student (Graham-Harrison & Cadwalladr, 2018; Marres & Stark, 2020). This application had extensive capabilities, such as collecting data from people who had installed Facebook and their friends. The app was initially made to be a survey tool where the users would complete a survey to exchange their Facebook data. However, the app collected user data without informing or seeking their consent.
In 2016, Donald Trump’s presidential team hired Cambridge Analytica to spearhead its political campaigns. In the same year, the “thisisyourdigitallife” formed by Kogan and his team shared data for millions of Facebook users with the consultancy firm. The following year, 2017, Facebook discovered some breaches in the user data through the API version 1.0 and decided to shut down the application. The following year, in 2018, the New York Times did an article about how Cambridge Analytica had used millions of user data to influence the 2016 presidential elections, resulting in a colossal public (Venturini & Rogers, 2019). Figure 1 below is a visual representation of the timeline of the events that resulted in the Cambridge Analytica scandal.
Analysis of the Scandal
User Privacy Concerns
The issue of user privacy concerns during the Cambridge Analytica scandal arose because the users felt betrayed by how the technology giant handled their data. Most users felt betrayed by the company’s loose policies of securing and protecting their data (Bakir, 2020). This significantly impacted the company as many users deleted their accounts while others called for increased regulations on privacy matters for social media companies. The problem could be fixed by implementing strict policies on how the company uses the customer’s data. Additionally, Facebook could give users more autonomy for opting out of specific data usage.
Facebook’s Response and Restructuring
Facebook’s actions in the aftermath of the Scandal indicate its severity. The company can make significant layoffs, such as forcing the resignation of its chief securities officer and its vice president of global operations (Creech & Maddox, 2022). Moreover, the company made structural changes, such as setting up a privacy department with a new privacy team and appointing a new head for global policy.
However, some people still feel that the actions taken by the company were not conclusive. Some possible responses Facebook could take include encrypting its data and conducting regular audits. The company could also change its primary sources of revenue from targeted advertisements to charging subscription fees for its services.
Facebook’s Public Relations Statements
During the Scandal, Facebook made several public statements in the hold to maintain good public relationships with stakeholders such as customers, governments, and third-party organizations. The CEO confessed that Facebook violated users’ privacy by allowing unethical third parties such as Cambridge Analytica access to its data (Bömelburg & Gassmann, 2021; Congress, 2019). The statements were limited in concreteness and made mainly to influence public relations. The company should have followed the statements with tangible actions, such as setting up an oversight team and educating its workforce on data privacy.
Public Reactions
The public reactions in the aftermath of the Cambridge Analytica scandal were significant, with many people expressing dissatisfaction with how Facebook handled personal data. This led to many users losing trust in the platform and even deleting their accounts (González et al., 2019). However, public statements like the ones made by the CEO helped maintain the company’s relationship with the public. Facebook should ensure that it remains transparent and accountable to prevent such reactions.
Congressional Hearings, FCC or EU Sanctions
The Cambridge Analytica scandal also led to an increased regulatory inquiry by local and international bodies on Facebook. The Federal Trade Commission launched investigations against the technology company (Ryle, Bueltel, McKnight, & Beckman, 2021). Across the Atlantic in Europe, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) was established by the EU, and the union also charged Facebook with imposition fines. This increased oversight by governmental bodies indicates how social media companies like Facebook have the power to influence opinions, which can create significant damage if left unchecked. To avoid conflicts with regulatory bodies, Facebook could focus on shifting its core cultures and values to ones that prioritize privacy and security.
Stock Price Movements
The stock price movements highlight the Cambridge Analytica Scandal’s immense significance on Facebook. When investigations revealed that Facebook had illegally leaked millions of users’ data, its share price fell from 185.09 to 172. 56 (Foecking, Wang, & Huynh, 2021). Therefore, addressing the issue helped Facebook to protect the user’s data and maintain investors’ confidence. For the company to keep its investors’ confidence, it must prove that the mistakes resulting from the Scandal are not repeated. The company should also prove to its shareholders that it is transparent and honest with the user’s data.
Data Issues in the Scandal
Types of Data Misused
Several types of data were misused in the book’s Cambridge Analytica scandal. The information obtained by the political advisory company from Facebook’s website included demographics, interests, and behaviors. This data was obtained from thisisyourdigitallife, an app that used Facebook’s API to get a user’s data (Graham-Harrison & Cadwalladr, 2018). Data misuse created social, ethical, and legal implications for Facebook and other digital companies.
Impacts of the Data Misuse
The impacts of the Cambridge Analytica scandal were huge for both Facebook users and the general public since Facebook data was used, ignoring their consent, thus making them lose the company’s trust. Allegations say the data was used to create targeted campaigns influencing the election outcome. The data misuse during the Scandal also ignited widespread debates, affecting the role technology companies should play in society. The breach also exposed social media companies’ vulnerabilities regarding third-party data harvesting.
Ways to Mitigate Data Misuse in the Future
Data misuse has several negative impacts; therefore, technology companies should ensure that third-party developers cannot access or use a client’s data without their consent. This goal could be achieved through the companies implementing strict data policies and regulations and increasing the oversight and auditing of the third-party apps that use the companies’ data. Conversely, users can safeguard their data by being careful about the information they share and their apps. The Cambridge Analytica scandal served as an exemplary case study of data misuse.
Technology and Platform
Vulnerabilities
The Scandal exposed various vulnerabilities in Facebook’s technology and platform. One of the vulnerabilities was the negligence of Facebook in permitting third-party apps to access user data without their consent and not overseeing the use of the data. Kogan’s app exploited this vulnerability by sharing data from users and friends with a consulting firm (Hinds, Williams, & Joinson, 2020). Another vulnerability exposed by the Scandal was the platform’s lack of transparency regarding how it handled users’ data. Facebook’s opaqueness in using its data for its users made it impossible for them to understand who had it and how it would be used.
Role of Technology in the Scandal
Facebook’s platform and technology played a crucial role in facilitating the Cambridge Analytica scandal by leaving out vulnerabilities that could be exploited. In addition to the platform being the data source, it was also the platform that Cambridge Analytica used to communicate its targeted pollical messages, thus influencing the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. Technology influences people’s choices, showing that regulations must be imposed to regulate social media companies.
Organization
Organizational Culture Contribution to the Scandal
Facebook’s organizational policies and cultures significantly influenced the Cambridge Analytica scandal. Before the Scandal, Facebook’s culture mainly focused on growth and innovation, which gave the company a luxurious approach to privacy and transparency issues (Bakir, 2020). Similarly, when implementing data policies and procedures, the company had complex organizational policies. This resulted in Facebook being unable to detect the unethical practices of the app and the political consultancy firm, thus eroding public trust in the platform.
Analysis of Facebook’s Organizational Response
In response to the Scandal and the public outcry that followed, Facebook took several measures to restore calm. First, the company limited Cambridge Analytica’s access to various Facebook platforms. It also conducted several internal investigations and used the analysis to change the privacy policy. However, critics have argued that more than the policies that Facebook took were needed to address the problems in Facebook’s organizational culture (Hu, 2020). The fact that Facebook initially denied involvement shows that the company is not as ethical as it is supposed to be.
Laws Violated by Facebook and Legal Implications
The Scandal raised several questions about how Facebook handled data, and the company was found to have violated several laws. In letting personal data leak, Facebook was found to have violated the GDPR rule in Europe and the FTC in the United States (Blend, 2020). The legislation in both companies mentioned above requires user consent before collecting and using their data. The Cambridge Analytica scandal’s legal implications were significant for Facebook and other technology companies.
Lessons Learned
For the Organization
Facebook did well by acknowledging the Scandal and accepting that Cambridge Analytica had used data from it unethically. It then blocked Cambridge Analytica from accessing large volumes of data and started investigations against all parties with large volumes of data from its application. (Congress, 2019). Facebook made changes such as depreciating API Version 1.0, which organizations use to access the company’s data without giving reasons.
Facebook did poorly by first concealing which customer data was misused during the Scandal. The Technology company should have informed all its users about the breach when it discovered it. Secondly, Facebook did poorly by taking too long to remove the API 1.0 application, a program that should never have been opened in the first place. During the Scandal, Facebook also appeared to try to hide the impact of the Cambridge Analytica scandal, which resulted in people losing trust and deleting their accounts.
The public was outraged by the data misuse in the Cambridge Analytica scandal, which raised questions about the fairness of democratic processes. Facebook’s targeted campaign advertisements for the 2016 elections were seen as a form of manipulation that used users’ preferences and biases to influence their voting decisions. Users could have been indifferent to commercialized campaigns of trusted brands like Nike and Adidas.
For the Industry, Government, and the Society
The Scandal exposed the importance of increased transparency when dealing with clients’ data. Therefore, other companies were able to learn from Facebook and implement better policies. The Scandal revealed that members of society collectively have tremendous power and control over corporate organizations. Similarly, governments understood the importance of governing social media sites to ensure the well-being of their citizens from unethical practices. Moreover, individuals learned they have the autonomy to state how social media sites can and cannot use their data.
Conclusion
The Scandal exposed unethical and irresponsible practices by both Facebook and highlighted the need for stricter regulations to safeguard users’ data and make technology companies accountable. Additionally, the outrage catalyzed a vast public debate on data privacy and the role of technology companies in ensuring that data for their clients is used ethically. Moreover, the Scandal greatly impacted Facebook, the industry, and society, thus demonstrating the importance of protecting user data.
Based on the analysis of the events during the Scandal, Facebook and the broader industry need to take the following measures. First, Facebook has to set up a team to regularly evaluate third-party oversight organizations that use the companies’ data. Secondly, the company should set up classes to educate its employees on the importance of data privacy and release those who do not conform to the standards to resign.
References
Bakir, V. (2020). Psychological operations in digital political campaigns: Assessing Cambridge Analytica’s psychographic profiling and targeting. Frontiers in Communication, pp. 5, 67. Web.
Blend, M. P. (2020). Data privacy standards in the United States: A case study of Facebook. Web.
Bömelburg, R., & Gassmann, O. (2021). Cambridge Analytica: Magical rise, disastrous fall. Connected Business: Create Value in a Networked Economy, 387-396. Web.
Confessore, N. (2018). Cambridge Analytica and Facebook: The Scandal and the Fallout so far. The New York Times. Web.
Congress. (2019). Library of Congress. Web.
Creech, B., & Maddox, J. (2022). Thus spoke Zuckerberg: Journalistic discourse, executive personae, and the personalization of tech industry power. New Media & Society. Web.
Foecking, N., Wang, M., & Huynh, T. L. D. (2021). How do investors react to the data breaches news? Empirical evidence from Facebook Inc. during the years 2016–2019. Technology in Society, 67. Web.
González, F., Yu, Y., Figueroa, A., López, C., & Aragon, C. (2019). Global reactions to the Cambridge Analytica scandal: A cross-language social media study. Companion Proceedings of the 2019 World Wide Web Conference on – WWW ’19. Web.
Graham-Harrison, E., & Cadwalladr, C. (2018). In a significant data breach, 50 million Facebook profiles were harvested for Cambridge Analytica. The Guardian. Web.
Hinds, J., Williams, E. J., & Joinson, A. N. (2020). “It would not happen to me”: Privacy concerns and perspectives following the Cambridge Analytica scandal. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 143. Web.
Hu, M. (2020). Cambridge Analytica’s black box. Big Data & Society, 7(2). Web.
Marres, N., & Stark, D. (2020). Put to the test: For a new sociology of testing. The British Journal of Sociology, 71(3), 423–443. Web.
Ryle, P. M., Bueltel, B. L., McKnight, M. A., & Beckman, J. K. (2021). Decoding lessons from the Facebook consent decree: Does Sarbanes–Oxley foreshadow the future of privacy regulation? International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, 19(1), 1–10. Web.
Venturini, T., & Rogers, R. (2019). “API-based research” or how can digital sociology and journalism studies learn from the Facebook and Cambridge Analytica data breach. Digital Journalism, 7(4), 532–540. Web.
