Encyclopedia of Opinion
Question
Should we boycott Facebook because of Cambridge Analytica?
Position‹3 of 3
Ignore it: Storm in a teacup
Argument

Everybody's doing it

Facebook isn't alone, almost every company on the planet is collecting data in this way.

The argument

We shouldn’t boycott Facebook because of the Cambridge Analytica scandal. A lack of data protection is common to most social media platforms and merely rejecting them is unrealistic. They are the public space for most of the online discourse that is taking place and thus it would be more constructive to find ways to resolve existing problems rather than passively retreating from a service. User initiatives or institutional interventions have shown to have a greater effect on companies like Facebook to increase their data protection and transparency of how personal data is processed. For instance, the European Union has made a first big step with the 2018 General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) that needs to be followed by all platforms operating in the member states of the EU. Another important step to make the issues public and to work on them were the public hearings of Facebook’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg before the US Senate. Another important factor is that Cambridge Analytica has been elevated to a big scandal even though data collection for the purpose of multitargeted advertisements and broader analysis is a common practice of all social media platforms that is taking place independently from the scandal. The scandal itself is only drawing attention to a bigger issue that inherently is a part of the social media platforms we operate on- We should focus on reforming the way they operate rather than retreating from them.

Context

The Cambridge Analytica scandal broke in 2018 when it was leaked that the company had collected personal data from over 87 million Facebook users to conceive multitargeted campaign strategies for their clients like the 2016 Leave campaign for Brexit or the election of Donald Trump in the US. Ever since, concerns about data protection and democratic manipulation have been voiced by the respective publics.

Premises

[P1]A lack of data protection is common to most social media platforms, so singling out Facebook and retreating is unrealistic. [P2] As the public space for online discourse, it is more constructive to reform these platforms — via GDPR or Senate hearings — than to passively abandon them. [P3] Cambridge Analytica only drew attention to data collection that is an inherent, industry-wide practice. [C] Therefore, because everybody's doing it and the issue is industry-wide, we should ignore the Cambridge Analytica scandal as a storm in a teacup rather than boycott Facebook.

Counter-arguments

1) Facebook should be boycotted, not only because the Cambridge Analytics scandal that revealed the most controversial misuse of personal data but also because the exploitation and commercial processing of personal data inherently defines its business model. 2) Social media platforms are free in access, but the users are paying with their personal data without knowing how and to what ends it is used and by whom. Microtargeted advertisements and political campaigning creates echo chambers and filter bubbles that threaten democracy and a healthy public discourse.

Rejecting the premises

[P1]Retreating from a broken system is better than reforming it.
[P2]Reform is not always an option.

Framing

Enjoying a convenient service weighs more than protecting personal data and its processing.