FACEBOOK EXEC: WE'RE NOT LIKE BIG TOBACCO BECAUSE SO MANY PEOPLE USE OUR PRODUCT; Vanity Fair, October 4, 2021

Eric Lutz, Vanity Fair; FACEBOOK EXEC: WE'RE NOT LIKE BIG TOBACCO BECAUSE SO MANY PEOPLE USE OUR PRODUCT

"“No one at Facebook is malevolent,” Haugen added, “but the incentives are misaligned.”

That, of course, speaks to the big issue facing Mark Zuckerberg: Though he insists that his platform is a force for good that is occasionally corrupted by the uglier parts of humanity, it may in fact be the case that the platform is corrupt by its very nature—and that talk of a safer Facebook, as Clegg suggested the company was working to deliver, is a bit like the “safer cigarettes” tobacco companies began marketing in response to health concerns more than half a century ago. That comparison, between Big Tech and Big Tobacco, has been made a lot recently, including by yours truly. But, asked by CNN’s Brian Stelter Sunday about the parallels, Clegg dismissed them out of hand as “misleading.”

“A part of me feels like I’m interviewing the head of a tobacco company right now,” Stelter said. “Part of me feels like I’m interviewing the head of a giant casino that gets rich by tricking its customers and making them addicted.”

“I think they’re profoundly false,” Clegg said of the analogies. “I don’t think it’s remotely like tobacco. I mean, social media apps, they’re apps. People download them on their phones, and why do they do that? I mean, there has to be a reason why a third of the world’s population enjoys using these apps.” 

His point about free will is well-taken; Zuckerberg obviously isn’t forcing anyone to scroll. But rejecting comparisons to an addictive product by pointing out how many people around the world use it hardly seems like a great defense; in fact, as NPR’s David Gura pointed out, the line actually made the parallels more pronounced."

A ‘beautiful’ female biker was actually a 50-year-old man using FaceApp. After he confessed, his followers liked him even more.; The Washington Post, May 11, 2021

  Drew Harwell

 and 

Shiori Okazaki

, The Washington Post ; A ‘beautiful’ female biker was actually a 50-year-old man using FaceApp. After he confessed, his followers liked him even more.

"Nakajima’s story casts a spotlight on the growing tension over identity and authenticity that has flared in the online age: What should we expect from the people we meet on the Internet, where algorithms can turn practically anything into a facade?

It also seemed to herald a darker future where our fundamental senses of reality are under siege:The AI that allows anyone to fabricate a face can also be used to harass women with “deepfake” pornography, invent fraudulent LinkedIn personas and digitally impersonate political enemies."

The Guardian view on Grindr and data protection: don’t trade our privacy; Guardian, April 3, 2018

Editorial, Guardian; The Guardian view on Grindr and data protection: don’t trade our privacy

"Whether the users were at fault for excessive trust, or lack of imagination, or even whether they were at fault at all for submitting information that would let their potential partners make a better informed choice, as liberal ethics would demand, the next thing to scrutinise is the role of the company itself. Grindr has now said that it will no longer hand over the information, which is an admission that it was wrong to do so in the first place. It also says that the information was always anonymised, and that its policy was perfectly standard practice among digital businesses. This last is perfectly true, and perhaps the most worrying part of the whole story.

We now live in a world where the valuations of giant companies are determined by the amount of personal data they hold on third parties, who frequently have no idea how much there is, nor how revealing it is. As well as the HIV status, and last test date, Grindr collected and passed on to third parties its users’ locations, their phone identification numbers, and emails. These went to two companies that promise to make it easier to deliver personalised advertisements to phones based on the users’ locations and to increase the amount of time they spend looking at apps on their phones. The data was in theory anonymised, although repeated experiments have shown that the anonymity of personal information on the internet is pretty easily cracked in most cases."