Don’t look to Facebook for transparency and security

Does it offer some comfort to know that Mark Zuckerberg is one of the 80 million or so Facebook users whose data was harvested and used to influence the outcome of the U.S. presidential election?

Zuckerberg, who is not only Facebook’s CEO, but also the chair of its board and its majority voting shareholder, offered up that revelation in testimony last Wednesday before American lawmakers. He was called to testify in response to the ongoing and growing controversy about the social media giant in the wake of unethical use of user data and a host of other problems.

Zuckerberg didn’t hesitate to acknowledge his company’s failures, but troubling questions remain. The company has faced years of questioning on many of these issues. Why didn’t it act sooner to mitigate the damage done by fake news? Why have terror groups and extremists of all sorts been able to thrive in the Facebook environment? Why didn’t it know, especially since it was warned, that some of the apps it welcomed into the Facebook world could be harvesting data for use by third parties? (That’s how Cambridge Analytica received data it later used to help the Trump campaign.) Why did it take the Cambridge Analytica debacle for Facebook to acknowledge user privacy settings weren’t adequately intuitive and easy to use and understand? Why was it taken by surprise by news that during the 2016 election campaign Russian propaganda accounts attacking Hillary Clinton and promoting Donald Trump were shared hundreds of millions of times?

Zuckerberg has said part of the problem was his personal misunderstanding of just how many people would try to use his company for nefarious purposes. To put it mildly, that strains credulity.

This man and his company — whose motto is “Move fast and break things” — have enjoyed astounding success through corporate aggression, playing hardball and taking on all competitive threats like they were high combat. Zuckerberg’s portrayal of himself as wide-eyed and naive sounds and feels bogus.

Another popular interpretation is more credible. Hyperaggressive competitive expansionist behaviour has driven Facebook to where it is today as the dominant social media platform in the world. Zuckerberg’s relentless drive and ambition haven’t left room for contemplation or caution. Zuckerberg has pursued his singular ambition with little tolerance for dissent. And this is where that has led.

This is no minor bump in the road for Facebook. Its stock price has been battered by the controversy. Zuckerberg’s resignation has been demanded by numerous industry experts. Some are calling for his empire, which includes Instagram, WhatsApp, Lightbox and dozens of other companies worth about $70 billion, to be broken up.

This much is clear: Governments, including in Canada, need to start taking consumer and citizen protection in the digital world more seriously. Europe has set the new standard with its General Data Protection Regulation. Canada should begin to move down this road without delay. Consumer protection, accountability and transparency mustn’t be left to companies like Facebook. It’s not at all clear they can be trusted going forward.