Everyone is mad
at Facebook. Somehow, a behemoth
technical service that allowed you to use their product without charge in
exchange for the right to sell your data became Public Enemy No. 1 when people
finally realized that their data had, as promised, actually been sold. And sold.
And sold.
All the clues
were there and had been for ages. If you
go online and browse a riding lawnmower at Sears, you are guaranteed to see the
same lawnmower on Facebook within 24 hours.
If you are reading this blog online, look at the ads just to the right
of these words. Do the products shown
look familiar? Who do you think pays for
the beer I drink while I write this?
To use a phrase
that has been endlessly repeated this week, if you don’t pay for the product,
you are the product. Facebook sold our
data to Cambridge Analytics, who in turn sold the data to the Republican Party
for use in the last election cycle. Four
years earlier, the Democrats had used your data to help elect President
Obama. And without a doubt, your data is
still being sold and resold endlessly.
Note.
I have always known this, which is why I never fill out online
forms accurately. Or even the same way
twice. It is impossible to keep your
data private, but you can keep your
data so confused and garbled as to be useless.
If you are one of the more than fifty people this week who congratulated
me on my birthday, thank you. But, I
confess, I didn’t really have a birthday this week. At least one of the credit reporting agencies
believes I am employed by Colonel Sanders as a chicken plucker.
This type of
data has been used to manipulate messages in presidential campaigns for longer
than you might suspect. The first such
successful use of computerized data to formulate arguments during a
presidential election was the 1960 campaign of John F. Kennedy.
This is not
the same as campaign polls, which can accurately tell a pollster which brand of
peanut butter you might prefer, but could never reveal why you chose as
you did. More important, this was a new
form of computer modeling that could predict how voters would respond to issues
before those issues were raised.
In essence, it could tell what would it take to influence the buyer to
pick a new brand of peanut butter. This
kind of analysis required the use of computers—large, expensive mainframe
computers.
Kennedy hired
the Simulmatics Corporation to do just that type of work on his campaign. Among the recommendations their research gave
his campaign was the strategy to vigorously counterattack the religious bigots
who were criticizing Kennedy’s Catholicism.
While Democratic Party leaders wanted to ignore the issue for fear of
exacerbating the situation and possibly alienating more voters, Simulmatics’
research showed that all of the damage had already been done, and Kennedy would
probably not lose more votes if he directly challenged the issue. Similarly, Simulmatics showed that if Kennedy
supported the Civil Rights movement, it
was not likely to cost him any additional votes in the South, but would attract
more Black voters.
It is impossible
to prove that Kennedy won the election because of this new computerized data
analysis, but I can point out that by the 1964 election, both parties were
engaged in this form of voter and issue research.
All of this is
painstakingly spelled out in a great novel from fifty-four years ago, The
480, by Eugene Burdick. I might as
well warn you right now, that even though this book is well written, extremely
relevant in today’s political climate, and still technically accurate in
showing the ways that voters can be manipulated during elections—you’re going
to have a tough time finding a copy.
Despite being a classic, it is not available on Kindle, and even an
aging paperback copy is fetching more than $20 a copy. None of the libraries I checked had a
copy.
The books of
Eugene Burdick used to be well-known: he
co-authored Fail-Safe with Harvey Wheeler and The Ugly American
with William Lederer. (Yes, both books
were made into famous movies and, no, neither movie was half as good as the
book.) The Ugly American has sold
millions and millions of copies, has never been out of print, and was probably
responsible for the creation of the Peace Corps. If you have a college degree and haven’t read
it, you should probably sue your alma mater for a tuition refund. (As an aside, our current use of the term,
"ugly American", is exactly the opposite of Burdick and Lederer's use
in their book: their ugly American was a
hero—and they coined the term—while our use of this now-common term refers to a
boor.)
Written in 1964
during the nightmare days just following the assassination of John F. Kennedy, The
480 deals with how computers had been used in 1960 and could be used to
sway the vote in the upcoming election.
The title of the book refers to the 480 categories of voters that
Simulmatics actually used to model American voters. The categories represented—in order of
importance—socioeconomic status, geographical region, education, race, and
party affiliation.
To put the whole
process in the simplest of terms, once the computers had established what you
were, they could accurately predict how your group would vote on proposed
topics. Though the white upper-middle
class urban Democrat voters of Kansas City had never been asked by a pollster
their position on whether America should remain in the United Nations,
Simulmatics could accurately predict how the topic—if raised by a
politician—would motivate voters in the upcoming election.
A running theme
in the book is the likelihood of presidential reelection. In the 1960’s, only two presidents seeking
reelection in the 20th century had failed.
Taft lost because Teddy Roosevelt ran against him and split the
Republican vote, thus handing the election to Wilson, while Hoover's reelection
bid fell victim to the start of the Great Depression. Burdick and many political scientists
believed that a sitting president was almost guaranteed reelection, unless
certain conditions were met. When I
reread the book this week, I could not refrain from listing those conditions
and look for them in Obama’s reelection in 2012 and in Trump’s impending
reelection attempt in 2020. If you read
the book, you will undoubtedly find yourself doing the same.
To be fair, some
of the book is a little dated, though most of
it has stood up to the test of time very well. The descriptions of IBM mainframes of the
early sixties are done with a little awe and reverence, and the IBM 5081
punchcard pictured on the book’s dust jacket is almost a distinct character in
the book. Today, the computer I am using
to write this is several thousand times more powerful than that antique
mainframe, and I doubt that my children would know what a punchcard was used
for. (I have several hundred old blank
cards boxed up in the garage—I wonder if I can sell them individually on eBay?)
The original
modeling for the Kennedy campaign by Simulmatics used 133,000 people and took
ten years to create. Today, Facebook has
admitted that the data of at least 90 million Americans was “scraped” by
corporations that update their models in real time. Google won’t comment on how it sells its
customer data, though it obviously does.
Apple says the data it sells is anonymous—meaning your name is
omitted—but Apple can’t prove it.
Most of us are
probably telling ourselves that this is someone else's problem and it doesn’t
really affect me. But, if you are
reading this online, look at the ad just to the right of this text.
Adsense thinks I'm still looking for a job. I do not disabuse them of that notion. I don't care what Big Brother knows. I believe the Apocalypse is coming anyway and as a trusted member of the blogospher, I want our insect overlords to know I can be useful in helping them round up other troublesome bloggers to work in their underground sugar caves.
ReplyDeleteJust so they know.
Tom