New questions for Facebook when he was aware of the data collection | Technology

A year after the scandal began, Facebook is facing new and explosive questions about when senior executives were informed of the misuse of Cambridge Analytica user data. Federal prosecutors are investigating allegations that the social media giant has concealed the extent of its media relations. strengthen.

the Observer also learned that a Facebook board member and confidant of his CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, had met Christopher Wylie, the whistleblower of Cambridge Analytica, in the summer of 2016, just when the company's processing company data was starting to work for the Trump campaign.

Facebook has repeatedly refused to say when its leaders, including Zuckerberg, had learned that Cambridge Analytica had used data collected from millions of people around the world to target them with political messages without their consent. But Silicon Valley insiders said to the Observer Marc Andreessen, a board member of Facebook, founder of venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz and one of Silicon Valley's most influential personalities, attended a meeting with Wylie held in Andreessen Horowitz offices two years before posing as a whistleblower.

It's the end of one of the worst weeks in Facebook's history. The shocking announcement on Friday that an armed man who killed 49 people praying in New Zealand watched the mbadacre on Facebook was crowned with news. In the hours that followed, Facebook and Google failed to prevent the videos from becoming viral, while hundreds of thousands of people watched the video.

But the ObserverThe revelations on Facebook open a new angle to the scandal that lasted a whole year, raising questions that go up to the board of directors.

Those attending the meeting with Wylie and Andreessen said that it was created to learn what Cambridge Analytica was doing with Facebook data and how technologists could work to "fix it". Andreesen Horowitz did not fully explain in what capacity and who attended the meeting, but it is nevertheless an extremely embarrbading revelation for Facebook, which was revealed last week as being the subject of a criminal investigation. Cambridge Analytica.

Federal prosecutors in the Northern District of California are investigating Facebook's claims that it was unaware of Analytica's abuse of Cambridge data. guardian journalist, the New York Times reported on Friday. "We cooperate with the investigators and take these probes seriously," said a Facebook spokesman New York Times.

Andreessen is one of the most influential personalities in Silicon Valley and was one of the first investors on Facebook. During the 2016 period in which Facebook said to investigate the misuse of data by Cambridge Analytica, Christopher Wylie was invited to a meeting of Andreessen Horowitz's firm.

Wylie, the young Canadian scientist specializing in data, would then expose the scandal of Observer one year ago. He then revealed how Cambridge Analytica had collaborated with a University of Cambridge scholar, Aleksandr Kogan, to collect Facebook data from users, without their consent, in order to model their personalities and target them politically.

A Silicon Valley technician familiar with the meeting at Andreessen Horowitz said: "Some people were very concerned about the information Cambridge Analytica provided on the data, and the meeting was organized to try to better understand as possible in order to find solutions possible. That's why Wylie was invited. They wanted his knowledge. He was asked a lot of questions, especially about the company's contacts with Russian entities. "

It is understood that a Facebook group was formed, of which Wylie was a member, and Andreessen would have kept in touch with Wylie until the end of the month. Observer broke the story of his involvement in March of last year.

A Valley insider who attended the meeting said, "What's strange is that there was no follow-up. The idea was to reverse the problem to find solutions. But we have never heard of a follow-up with Facebook's security team or any attempt to implement this information. "

Andreessen Horowitz refused to answer questions ObserverQuestions from. Facebook has repeatedly refused to tell members of Congress and the British parliamentary inquiry committee about false information when senior officials have learned about data abuse. He also refused to answer the ObserverQuestions from.

A spokesman said: "Facebook was not aware of the Kogan / GSR data transfer [Kogan’s business Global Science Research] Cambridge Analytica until December 2015. When Facebook learned that Kogan had broken Facebook's data usage rules, we acted. "

In another twist, Kogan told the New York Times On Friday, he intends to sue Facebook for defamation for allegedly misleading the company over how he intended to use the data. A Facebook spokesman called the trial "frivolous".

Damian Collins, president of the false parliamentary inquiry, said: "Facebook has refused to say which leaders knew what, when. They never explained whether the data had been destroyed or where it was sent.

"Last year, at the end of the story, the group announced the opening of an internal investigation into what other developers had access to data, including companies like Palantir. And he never reported. It's hard not to wonder why he's so evasive. "

David Carroll, an American professor who sued Cambridge Analytica in court for not telling him the personal data he had, said that it was essential to know who knew what when. "Why is Facebook scrambling?" He said. "We know that Facebook actually employed Joseph Chancellor, Kogan's business partner before guardian first report. It defies to believe that nobody knew anything. Zuckerberg's responses to Congress under oath are incredulous. It's amazing that a year later and we still do not know these basic facts. "

The ongoing battle between Carroll and Cambridge Analytica is reaching a critical point tomorrow. He is in the high court against the directors of Cambridge Analytica to oppose the dissolution of the companies. Carroll is concerned about the extent to which the directors have concealed the true nature of their relationship with Emerdata, the successor of the company, and the true purpose of the company's liquidation attempt. "They did everything to avoid giving me my data. It's the same as Facebook. They seem desperate for the truth not to be revealed. The directors contest the claims and continue their attempts to liquidate and resist Professor Carroll.

Ravi Naik, Carroll's attorney, who won the Best Human Rights Lawyer of the Year award for his work, said it was an important moment in his battle to uncover the truth about human rights. data held by Cambridge Analytica.

"Facebook has tried to avoid telling the truth through these evasive responses to lawmakers. And Cambridge Analytica have tried to do it through insolvency. We know that this completely toxic swamp of data has been used to target people in a political way, but we still do not know where these data came from or how they were used. We are always completely in the dark. This is an attempt to open this safe.