Mark Zuckerberg Lied to Congress

[truthatallcost]

Well...and also seeing it as an opening to insert themselves in to control the information flow and therefor control us better.

Exactly well said. FB won't get out of line again.

 

[Parrish]

Then I guess Facebook doesn't help candidates win elections!

It certainly helped Tillis. In a tightly contested race against Sen. Kay Hagen (D) NC.

 

[AustralianuS]

How's this?

That Zuckerberg convo has been available online for about 10 years.

THat conversation has nothing to do with user agreements.

 

[AustralianuS]

OK, Reckon the FTC is investigating FB and how they allowed the Obama campaign to do essentially the same as CA ??

I have no clue what they are investigating.

 

[ajn678]

It certainly helped Tillis. In a tightly contested race against Sen. Kay Hagen (D) NC.

Got any proof of this?

 

[Parrish]

Got any proof of this?

Tillis Used Cambridge Analytica In 2014 Campaign | WUNC

 

[Hari Seldon]

Except those who told us that our lives would cease to exist unless we were on Facebook.

People without Facebook pages, in particular, are viewed as “suspicious” by hiring managers

Not Being on Facebook Will Arouse Employer Suspicion | TIME.com

https://www.flexjobs.com/blog/post/no-social-media-presence-is-bad-for-job-seekers/


Of course that was all nonsense, and the Bergs at Facebook probably paid journalists to write those articles, but I'm sure it had some effect on people.

Time? I didn't realize they were still in business. Is Life still around?

 

[ajn678]

Tillis Used Cambridge Analytica In 2014 Campaign | WUNC

So the answer is no. See the deal with saying things like "this swayed an election" is there is very little evidence you can give to actually prove that happened. There is nothing in the article, nor any studies done that would suggest that this data, nor any data used by Cambridge Analytica changed the outcome of an election. Again, just because some loons on the left like to make up conspiracies of massive amounts of people changing their votes due to Facebook ads, doesn't mean it actually happened.

 

[Parrish]

So the answer is no. See the deal with saying things like "this swayed an election" is there is very little evidence you can give to actually prove that happened. There is nothing in the article, nor any studies done that would suggest that this data, nor any data used by Cambridge Analytica changed the outcome of an election. Again, just because some loons on the left like to make up conspiracies of massive amounts of people changing their votes due to Facebook ads, doesn't mean it actually happened.

So you're not really an Independent. Alrighty then.

 

[ajn678]

So you're not really an Independent. Alrighty then.

Well that's where you're wrong, again, funny how that keeps happening. I just don't choose to believe Nanny state bull**** made to give the government more rights over website controls that sadly both parties seem to be in full support of now.

 

[Parrish]

Well that's where you're wrong, again, funny how that keeps happening. I just don't choose to believe Nanny state bull**** made to give the government more rights over website controls that sadly both parties seem to be in full support of now.

Thanks for coming clean and admitting that you're not truly an independent thinker, just one of the herd.

 

[ajn678]

Thanks for coming clean and admitting that you're not truly an independent thinker, just one of the herd.

Says the person that believes made up bull****.

 

[ksu_aviator]

Anyone want to try this? If you have Facebook, with it turned off, your phone in standby and in your pocket say "Bass Boat" five times. Then, open Facebook and see what adds pop up. FYI...this isn't as impressive if you've been looking for a bass boat on Google.

 

[Parrish]

Says the person that believes made up bull****.

So you're admitting you believe the BS. TY. I'm done here.

 

[ajn678]

So you're admitting you believe the BS. TY. I'm done here.

Let's try again. You made a statement. I asked for proof. You provided none, because you can't. You can't provide proof because there is no proof. So at the very least you're spreading misinformation, I will give you the benefit of the doubt. Then you double down and tell me that I believe falsehoods, because I dared question your statement in which you can't provide any evidence for. Seems like you should probably work on your debating abilities. It helps that when you make statements, you can back them up. TY.

 

[Parrish]

Let's try again. You made a statement. I asked for proof. You provided none, because you can't. You can't provide proof because there is no proof. So at the very least you're spreading misinformation, I will give you the benefit of the doubt. Then you double down and tell me that I believe falsehoods, because I dared question your statement in which you can't provide any evidence for. Seems like you should probably work on your debating abilities. It helps that when you make statements, you can back them up. TY.

You're cute when you're mad. Now, find someone else to troll. Please.

 

[ajn678]

You're cute when you're mad. Now, find someone else to troll. Please.

Today I learned that trolling is asking someone to verify a claim. Facts don't matter anymore I guess.

 

[ludin]

So how much money did FB get from Cambridge Analytica?

FB was the reason that Trump won.

No nominating clinton was the reason trump won.

 

[truthatallcost]

Time? I didn't realize they were still in business. Is Life still around?

Idk. You should pray to the Google gods to seek answers to life's questions.

 

[truthatallcost]

It certainly helped Tillis. In a tightly contested race against Sen. Kay Hagen (D) NC.

She lost by 45k votes, despite having the most money to spend of any D incumbent.

 

[truthatallcost]

THat conversation has nothing to do with user agreements.

Look, use agreements are available for every app you download. Do you read them?

 

[Moot]

Wow, my post went viral. lol

So how much money did FB get from Cambridge Analytica?

FB was the reason that Trump won.

Sad, and not one independent critical thought among you....baaaa...

I thought it was Russia?

Interesting.
Are you a FB user?
If you are, did FB influence the way you voted?

I thought it was Russia?

I heard that he is not testifying under oath, if true he can lie all he wants.

Turn about is fair play. They willingly helped Obama get elected in 2012 by opening friends lists.

How the Obama Campaign Used Facebook to Connect with Young Voters | TIME.com

Oh, it wasn't the Russians? Nor, Comey?

No it wasn't.

Hahahahaha....no. The Democrats had/have way more information from Facebook than Trump/Republicans did/do.

Trump would have won anyway. HRC never had the public appeal that Obama or Bill Clinton had.

FB made the Democrats run Hillary? Hadn't heard that before.

No nominating clinton was the reason trump won.

Calm your nips, boyz. LOL

It's true...FB is the reason Trump won...

"I understood early that Facebook was how Donald Trump was going to win. Twitter is how he talked to the people. Facebook was going to be how he won." - Brad Parscale

“The campaign poured money into Facebook, sending thousands of versions of tweaked ads to maximize response. Then it won the presidency by a margin narrow enough that Parscale (and Facebook) can justifiably take credit.” - — Philip Bump, The Washington Post​

donald-trump-won-because-of-facebook

how-facebook-and-twitter-quietly-helped-trump-win

facebooks-role-in-trumps-win-is-clear-no-matter-what-mark-zuckerberg-says

:mrgreen:


According to the Trump campaign's digital operations chief, CA worked "side-by-side" with representatives from Facebook, Alphabet Inc. and Twitter on Trump's digital campaign activities...

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


"...Cambridge worked both for the Trump campaign and a Trump-aligned Super PAC....

In June 2016, Cambridge sent three staffers, led by chief product officer Matt Oczkowski, to the campaign’s San Antonio office. Oczkowski’s team eventually grew to 13 people, working under Trump digital director Brad Parscale and alongside his staff and outside consultants. According to Parscale, the Cambridge staff provided useful analysis of data about the American electorate....

Former Trump campaign manager and chief strategist to President Trump, Steve Bannon, also held a position on Cambridge's board. The company itself is an offshoot of the British firm, SCL, which has roots in government and military operations..."

what-did-cambridge-analytica-really-do-for-trumps-campaign

cambridge-academic-trawling-facebook-had-links-to-russian-university

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

russian-hacking-election-widespread-private-data

how-russians-used-the-same-social-media-tactics-that-worked-for-trump

"....As Facebook reeled, The Times delved into the relationship between Cambridge Analytica and John Bolton...
cambridge-analytica-scandal-fallout​

 

[jnug]

I am more disappointed in what we saw from the Senate yesterday though you could see this coming from a mile away. How in the name of God are these old duffers supposed to take on a 33 year man that actually created the platform in 6 minutes bites of time no less. That was no contest...a publicity stunt at best. That accomplished nothing beyond giving Zuckerberg more rope.

I don't know if the House will do better today out of embarrassment for the Senate. That was terrible.

 

[jdog21]

I am more disappointed in what we saw from the Senate yesterday though you could see this coming from a mile away. How in the name of God are these old duffers supposed to take on a 33 year man that actually created the platform in 6 minutes bites of time no less. That was no contest...a publicity stunt at best. That accomplished nothing beyond giving Zuckerberg more rope.

I don't know if the House will do better today out of embarrassment for the Senate. That was terrible.

I have to agree, they wont fare any better.
A lot of people are interested in making their internet usage private, Both parties are beholden to the big money behind user data and they are just doing a dog a pony show to show the voters they talked to a business leader about CA and privacy concerns. In the end nothing comes of it.

 

[Hawkeye10]

I am more disappointed in what we saw from the Senate yesterday though you could see this coming from a mile away. How in the name of God are these old duffers supposed to take on a 33 year man that actually created the platform in 6 minutes bites of time no less. That was no contest...a publicity stunt at best. That accomplished nothing beyond giving Zuckerberg more rope.

I don't know if the House will do better today out of embarrassment for the Senate. That was terrible.

It really does drive home what second and third rate people we have in Congress now, what a disaster.