The Great Hack - Netflix

I'd thoroughly recommend this - definitely worth a watch. The documentary offers an oversight into how our data (through Cambridge Analytica), via platforms such as Facebook, can be used to influence elections and political campaigns.

The documentary takes a look at the 2016 Trump & Brexit campaigns, exposing the influence that the company had in using 'persuadables' (based on Facebook questionnaires amongst other things) to influence the outcome of certain agendas. Featuring whistleblowers such as Chris Wylie and Brittany Kaiser, as well as exposing the links between the Trump campaign and the Brexit campaign (via figures such as Steve Bannon).

https://www.vox.com/culture/2019/7/25/8930283/great-hack-review-netflix-facebook-cambridge-analytica

Interesting. Currently watching a history programme about the undoing of Charles the first. Turns out Brexit isn't the first time populist propoganda has been used to further political ambition.

Is that also when they started the anti EU stuff?

Well kind of. John Pym, the Reece-Mogg of his day used a series of underhanded parliamentary procedures and propoganda to try and wrestle power from the king using the cloak of fear of Catholicism from Europe and, you guessed it, Ireland.

What is interesting is that a feud between two men ripped the country in two and resulted in a 9 year civil war.

Brexit isn't about Britain, sovereignty, or trade. It is the result of two dozen or so rich ideological Tories and their infighting in the Tory party. Brexit is just collateral damage. The result, a country torn in two whose political system has been shredded.

It had better be worth it because right now, those Tories are enjoying massive bonners whilst the rest of us wallow in very real economic uncertainty which could potentially last for 20+ years. We think this is about us choosing our way democratically but like in 1647, it was the ultimate manipulation of a population to do the bidding of those seeking power.

You had better have a plan because Boris doesn't. He is heading for the highest part of the cliff. But don't worry, he, Farage and Reece-Mogg and their millionaire mates will be just fine.

John Pym, the Reece-Mogg of his day

I've never really fully understood this particular argument, correct me if I'm wrong but surely it's younger people that use Facebook more ( as a percentage) there's also the fact that many older people's opinions were formed long before Facebook even existed.
But if it helps for you to believe this conspiracy nonsense then so be it.

1) Over 55s are now the second most prominent user-base on Facebook. They're the fastest growing demographic following a shift of young users moving away from Facebook, opting for Instagram and Snapchat instead. According to the Telegraph, 48% (ironically) of those aged 65-74 now have a Facebook account - these have been aptly named 'social seniors'. At one time, during the late 00s, Facebook was a young persons game - not so much any more.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/14/rise-social-seniors-number-over-75s-facebook-doubles/
https://www.aarp.org/home-family/personal-technology/info-2018/facebook-users-age-fd.html
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/feb/12/is-facebook-for-old-people-over-55s-flock-in-as-the-young-leave

2) The two aren't mutually exclusive. Just because younger people may use social media more, & and that the referendum was backed by a majority of older people, it doesn't mean to say that there's no possible way that CambridgeAnalytica influenced the outcome. This issue isn't that binary - young people using Facebook more & older people voting Leave are just trends and non exclusives. Further, given the tight margins involved, even if just 1 in 50 people were influenced in this way (totalling 700,000), this would have been enough to entirely swing the result.

It's a shame that you felt the need to label this a 'conspiracy theory', now you just look like a baby throwing your toys out of the pram. If you've got any specific claims that you'd like to refute then go ahead, I'm all ears. The accusations levied against CambridgeAnalytica are fairly well-documented and this discussion isn't exclusively about Brexit; its part of a wider debate about internet privacy and the sharing of user-information to influence politics & agendas.

Hmm, Instagram you say.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/apr/28/instagram-at-the-crossroads-profits-facebook-data-scandal-politics-influencers-mental-health
Oh and whilst we're on the subject of people throwing toys out of their prams there has been no actual evidence that anyone had their minds changed by Facebook, even the arch remainer Nick Clegg admits it.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/jun/24/nick-clegg-facebook-brexit-vote

That was a nice way of avoiding both of the points that I made to refute your claim. Great to see that good debating etiquette is alive and well on TSR!

I'd also point to the first paragraph of the article that you quoted: "it has been a rough few weeks for Facebook since the Observer reported the Cambridge Analytica data breach. The scandal revealed how the political consulting firm might have raked up the personal information of at least 87 million Facebook users in order to influence them with tailored political ads, sent the social network’s stocks into a tailspin".

Notwithstanding, the pitfalls of Instagram are totally irrelevant to this conversation. We're specifically talking about Facebook and the Cambridge Analytica data breaches.

Did you trust Nick Clegg when he promised not to increase tuition fees? Probably - as did most people (me included) - but we were all wrong to do so, right? Nick Clegg is the Head of Communications at Facebook - lets not pretend that's a minor detail in all of this. The man has a vested interest in protecting the reputation of the company that he works for. The data breaches that occurred are still under investigation & evidence is being reviewed; I've no doubt that in the coming months the scandal will be viewed in a totally different light.

https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/cambridge-analytica-dcms-evidence-brexit-leave-eu/

I'd appreciate it if you addressed both of the points I raised in the previous post. That'd be a nice place to start!

Okay point 1, you say that the over 55's are the second largest user base on Facebook, could you please provide us all with the information on which age group is the largest, or more specifically which was the largest in 2016.
Furthermore the simple fact of the matter is that more people aged 55 and over actually voted to remain in the EU than those aged in the 18-25 age group, I suppose that those particular elderly voters weren't brainwashed by Facebook!
On point 2 there are no facts about how many people were in some way influenced by Facebook so all your figures are merely conjecture, they are no more provable than me questioning how many people ( particularly older voters) were scared into voting remain because of Cameron and Osbourne's project fear bs or duped into doing so by following the instructions on the how to fill in your postal vote leaflet which conveniently had a cross in the remain box, until the electoral commission forced them to change it that is.
And on your last point no I don't believe a word that comes out of Nick Clegg's mouth, but you remainers did during the referendum.

It's not 'what I say', it's what the data says. I posted a link to various outlets quoting over-55s being the second largest Facebook user base. For what its worth, you didn't bother to cite any sources for your claim. Also, I don't have to keep pandering to your needs "can you please provide us with X", especially when you're not prepared to do the same in return.

Below is data from 2016. 62% of over 65 year olds use Facebook. That's higher than the figure from the Telegraph that I quoted earlier, so you can decide which of the two you believe.

https://www.pewinternet.org/2016/11/11/social-media-update-2016/

I didn't quote any numbers. I didn't argue that the Leave camp triumphed specifically because of the actions of CA. I said that the company influenced the outcome - the extent of which isn't known. It could have been negligible, or it could have been significant. The only numbers that we have at the minute concern the amount of data breaches (87m); the significance of this in the Brexit campaign isn't yet known.

As I've already said, numbers aside, this has serious implications for the future of data, privacy, & politics. In employing Cambridge Analytica, the tactics used by the Trump campaign & Brexit campaign were disgraceful, underhand, and unethical - the significance of their influence isn't fully known yet, but that's another issue entirely.

Finally, please don't tell me what I do and don't believe. You know nothing about me. But thanks for proving my point - if you didn't believe a word he said about the EU, why do you take his word as gospel when he's talking about the CA scandal?