Facebook Whistleblower: MSM Concealing Fact Facebook Routinely Allowed “Horrifying” Misuse of User Info

On Monday we chronicled how the mainstream media was displaying a purposeful level of shock over Cambridge Analytica’s successful efforts in mining data from the Facebook platform in support of the Trump campaign.

We pointed out that the outrage pouring forth from the MSM was provably contrived because they were aware that it had been going on for two previous election cycles by Obama’s media analytics team.  In fact the New York Times had praised Obama’s data-mining efforts as a “Force Multiplier.”

Carol Davidsen ran the Obama campaign’s cyber operations and admitted Facebook told her they allowed her to capture the personal information of every user on their platform because the agreed with her politics:

Yesterday, news broke that the Feds were probing Facebook over the Cambridge Analytica breach.  We opined that there was a lot more to the probe than the Cambridge breach.

Now Facebook’s former Platforms Operations Manager, Sandy Parakilas is claiming that the company’s misuse of user data was routine and horrifying.  Parakilas added that Facebook preferred to have “no idea” what third parties were doing with the freely available data.


“My concerns were that all of the data that left Facebook servers to developers could not be monitored by Facebook, so we had no idea what developers were doing with the data.  It has been painful watching… Because I know that they could have prevented it.”

“Once the data left Facebook servers there was not any control, and there was no insight into what was going on.  Facebook was in a stronger legal position if it didn’t know about the abuse that was happening.

“They felt that it was better not to know. I found that utterly shocking and horrifying.

“In the time I was there, I didn’t see them conduct a single audit of a developer’s systems.  Facebook was giving data of people who had not authorized the app themselves, and was relying on terms of service and settings that people didn’t read or understand.

“I didn’t feel that the company treated my concerns seriously. I didn’t speak out publicly for years out of self-interest, to be frank.

“They treated it like a PR exercise.  They seemed to be entirely focused on limiting their liability and exposure rather than helping the country address a national security issue.”

Parakilas said that Facebook only started to take action following the media’s allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.

So, at the end of the day, Cambridge Analytica has been suspended and hundreds of conservative publishers have been silenced through the use of algorithms known only to Facebook.

Facebook has created a permanent structural political advantage for Democrats.  An argument can easily be made that this in kind contribution is worth a billion dollars or more.

What amount of fines and penalties can restore the balance to our politics?  What fine could sufficiently punish Facebook for failing to the Federal Election Commission its in kind contribution to the past and future Democrats?