If it was not such a
serious issue, I would have been laughing my head off, watching the videos of
Mr. Zuckerberg attempting to explain the intricacies of modern technology and
internet-lingo to senior citizens of the American Congress.
But it is a serious issue
that Facebook allowed the (illegal) collation of data by Cambridge Analytica,
to be sold to and used by political forces with the big bucks.
*angryface*
Cambridge Analytica (CA) is
a political consulting firm, which specialises in providing data mining and analysis
services for elections.
Over time, CA has been found
to use its data mining resources in influencing various elections, even as it illegally
obtained voters’ information via Facebook for targeted campaigns.
Preeminent among the
elections alleged to have been influenced are the Unites States’ 2016 elections
and the Nigerian 2015 elections.
In the case of the US
elections, the former employee turned ‘singing-canary’ - Chris Wylie - disclosed
that CA's modus operandi was to flood potential voters with information
painting Mrs. Clinton in bad light.
Thus, the CA machinery
was aimed at removing what could be considered as “the incumbent”, by bombarding
potential voters with negative information regarding Hilary Clinton. Such as
her emails debacle.
But in the case of the
2015 Nigerian elections, the reverse was the case:
The CA machinery was deployed
for the purpose of enabling the (then) incumbent to remain in power, by
painting a gory picture of impending bloodshed and widespread terror among the
people, if the (then) opposition won elections.
Well... we all witnessed
what happened in 2015 and in 2016 respectively. While the opposition won the
2015 Nigerian elections, the “incumbent” in the US 2016 elections in the person
of Hilary Clinton lost the election, to his Excellency and Commander-in-Chief of
the Twitter Forces, Mr. Donald Trump.
(I never thought I’d see
the day)
I accept that it was
wrong for Cambridge Analytica to illegally obtain private information, and that
Mr. Zuckerberg should be sent to the naughty corner, for allowing Facebook to
be a careless pawn.
I equally agree that it
was wrong for this illegally obtained information to be (literally) sold to “the
highest bidder”, off the shelves of the personal data black-market, and
subsequently flood Facebook users with targeted pieces of information.
Where I however do not align
with the majority of opinions is the degree of influence (if any) which these
targeted campaigns really had on the voters.
I mean, in the case of
Hilary Clinton, the general complaint from the average person on the street –
even before Mr. Trump threw his hat in the ring – was that she was “cold”, appeared
quite “manipulative” and came across as “inauthentic”.
This was coupled with her
husband’s said sexcapades as POTUS, so that many considered it a slap on the
face for her seek a ‘return’ to the same position.
America had
long made its decision, irrespective of Cambridge Analytica’s meddling. There
was nothing Mrs. Clinton was going to do make the people accept her.
They just were not ready
for a female President. Especially not one as qualified as her, whose hands-on
experience of the job requirements had essentially morphed into a curse, and had
become her Achilles heel.
Thus, while other
aspirants could more easily dive into answering questions with a truckload of
naive optimism, she lacked that luxury, having the weight of practical
knowledge to require that she filters her answers.
Sadly, this was often
interpreted as her being ‘calculative’.
And whereas male
counterparts could have gotten away with negotiating any situations, and being
strategic, she was hardly afforded that privilege. Thus, what would otherwise
be described as being “strategic” or “in-control” was termed (in her case) “manipulative”.
But the saddest part was
her having to carry the cross of her husband’s unsavoury philandering;
suffering the double jeopardy of the personal ridicule as a wife, yet, bearing
the brunt of the direct connection to the unpleasant amoral memories he left in
his Presidency’s wake.
While it would now be
convenient to blame Cambridge Analytica for the (rather bizarre) choice in Presidents by the American voters, the truth remains that Cambridge Analytica could only
have influenced the decisions (if at all), based on already existing individual opinions,
and a large aversion to (what was considered as) a return of the Clinton Presidency.
(Phew! That was one long sentence)
This point is illustrated
in the failure of Cambridge Analytica to similarly achieve their desired
results in Nigeria. Just like in the Unites States, a large number of the Nigerian populace were highly disenchanted with the government of the day, and what was considered as the maddening heights of corruption.
Even though the gory pictures
of wide-spread bloodshed, terror and deepened poverty in Nigeria as earlier ‘predicted’ by Cambridge Analytica currently
seem to be playing out in an ironic twist of fate, the said pictures and
targeted information did not however influence the populace at the time of the
election campaigns
Why?
Because the Nigerian populace
was bent on removing (or at the very least, not supporting) the incumbent, and
no amount of targeted ads could change this.
The bottom-line is that
even while Cambridge Analytica and Facebook may be crucified for the illegal
mining and utilisation of individuals’ data, one cannot validly pin the
impending nuclear war, or the current trade-wars with between the United Stated
and China on Cambridge Analytica.
Cambridge Analytica could
only flex so much muscle. It was the populace who had the real power.
What they decide to do with
it going forward still remains in their own hands.
Paz,
Meg.
*Have you followed our blog today? Simply click on the Follow button to the right-side of the post, for your computer screen, or keeeep scrolling down on your hand-held device. And keeeeeeeep scrolling further down, to add us to your circles.
![About [span]me[/span]](https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-9dGaclRWUs8/WKruZbxtW9I/AAAAAAAABjE/UmlCob4wbt8vbp13E9omLuzP5TLYWoGoACLcB/s1600/IMG-20170220-WA0007.jpg)
