A Look at Facebook’s 2018 Scandals

It first started with Cambridge Analytica. Then the alleged Russian interference in the U.S. midterm elections. One after the other, the scandals of Facebook began to stack up, accumulating in mass. The headlines “Facebook shares user data with X” or “Facebook used for propaganda by Y” are no longer news, but a confirmation of the disheartening reality of the social media giant.  

The greater the number of users, the greater the potential for rewards—and risks. With 2.27 billion active users, Facebook must constantly monitor, assess, and improve its platform. When things are going well, everyone is happy. However, when a problem arises, millions are affected. For Facebook, 2018 is marked by the latter. Buried in headlines of data leaks, privacy violations, and propaganda, the dark side of Facebook has not shied away from the spotlight.  

Let us review four major Facebook scandals and the role it has played as either an unwitting participant and or a perpetrator.  

In March 2018, Facebook shocked the world with the Cambridge Analytica scandal. The political consulting firm was revealed to have harvested personal data from millions of Facebook users without consent through a personality test. Although only 270,000 participants agreed to share their information, the Facebook platform enabled Cambridge Analytica to access the data of up to 87 million users. Outbreak of the news caused public outcry, and promptly called for the involvement of the Federal Trade Commission (F.T.C), Justice Department, and the FBI. 

The F.T.C. viewed the Cambridge Analytica episode as Facebook’s violation of the federal consent agreement, where Facebook promised to protect consumer privacy and confidentiality. It also accused Facebook of deceiving users by “telling them they could keep their information on Facebook private, and then repeatedly allowing it to be shared and made public.” Further probe into the investigation led to the testimony of Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who apologized for his negligence in dealing with confidentiality issues. After the scandal, Facebook reported a market-value loss of approximately $134 billion. 

Just as the Cambridge Analytica scandal died down, another emerged. In July 2018, Facebook warned of possible Russian interference in the U.S. midterm elections. The incident identified 25 fake pages and accounts with names such as “Aztlan Warriors,” “Black Elevation,” “Mindful Beings,” and “Resistors.” The fake personas did not particularly favour any candidate, but amplified division among Americans on hot-button issues such as immigration and race through the spread of disinformation. As Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr said, "The goal of these operations is to sow discord, distrust, and division in an attempt to undermine public faith in our institutions and our political system. The Russians want a weak America."  

To boost attendance to their political events, sham accounts collaborated with legitimate pages to co-host real-life events. At one point, the accounts had as many as 290,000 followers. The organization is estimated to have spent $11,000 on 150 ads. Although Facebook is not in full confidence that the campaign is tied to the Russia-based Internet Research Agency, it appears suspiciously. The tactics deployed are similar to the ones used in 2016 when the infamous agency attempted to influence the Trump elections. Upon discovery, Facebook has acted to remove the accounts. 

Not long after the Russian Facebook scandal, Facebook again made headlines; this time, for its connection to Myanmar military. Facebook discovered sham accounts created by Myanmar military personnel who posed as fans of celebrities, which outwardly focused on entertainment but was in practice linked to military and political influence. The troll accounts served as a distribution channel for controversial photos and fake news. Their goal was to build a following, then publicize their hate toward the Muslim Rohingya minority group. Calling it an “ethnic cleansing” campaign, the military sought to generate fear among the people and show that it is the only source of protection and support. 

Stories denounced Islam as a national threat to Buddhism, and one told the rape of a Buddhist woman by a Muslim man. A noteworthy campaign occurred in 2017, when military personnel fabricated stories on Facebook of an imminent war between Muslims and Buddhists and notified each party that the other was preparing for invasion. The presence of the false personas grew so pervasive and their opinions so legitimately taken that many users mistook the Silicon Valley social media platform as the Internet. In August, Facebook took down the suspicious accounts, but did not further investigate the situation. Many were infuriated with Facebook’s lack of intervention, calling the social media company a “beast” used to incite genocide and the systematic slaughtering of Muslims. 

The three previous scandals present Facebook as an unwitting participant. Once Facebook became aware it was used to influence public opinion, actions were taken. However, the next scandal was one where Facebook took an active role to compromise user privacy for private gains. In December, Facebook was exposed for making special arrangements with over 150 device manufacturers, media companies and others including Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, Netflix, Spotify, and the Royal Bank of Canada. The deals, which began as early as 2010, revealed that Facebook partners had access to more extensive information than users were informed of. The companies, many of which are not displayed in the profile application settings of users, could retrieve information the same way third parties could when users grant the site permission to Login using Facebook. This includes reading the private messages of users and accessing their friend lists. 

In its deal with particular device makers such as Apple, Samsung, BlackBerry, Facebook allowed companies to collect information on users and friends, even those who have explicitly denied Facebook permission to access such information. Facebook’s justification is that it considers the device markers an extension of its network and that its partners were “service providers.” It therefore argues that granting access to private user information is consistent with the 2011 federal consent agreement.  

To spectators, the scandals are captivating. To victims, the scandals are devastating. Whether or not Facebook is cooperating with or manipulated by third-party organizations, one thing is for certain: Facebook is no longer a safe repository for personal data. As users of Facebook, it is in our best interest to take precautions. Weigh the benefits and risks of giving other sites access to your Facebook profiles. Think twice before compromising privacy in exchange for a little convenience. As for the rest, we will have to trust that Facebook’s intention aligns with ours. Facebook has thrived for 14 years; why should it not continue to do so?