Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SEC Investigating if Facebook Gave Investors Enough Warning About Data Issue, WSJ Says

posted by mrpg on Friday July 13 2018, @11:21AM   Printer-friendly
from the who-knew-what-when? dept.
News

martyb writes:

SEC asking if Facebook properly warned investors of data issue -- WSJ

The Securities and Exchange Commission is looking into whether Facebook gave investors enough warming about the possible misuse and improper gathering of users' data, The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday (paywalled).

[...] The SEC has requested information from Facebook in an effort to learn how much the social networking company knew about Cambridge Analytica's data use, according to the Journal. In addition, the SEC reportedly wants to learn how Facebook analyzed its risk as developers shared data with others against Facebook's policies.

[...] The SEC is also looking into whether Facebook should have told shareholders about Cambridge Analytica's policy violation when it found out in 2015.

Also at MarketWatch and NYT.

Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
SEC Investigating if Facebook Gave Investors Enough Warning About Data Issue, WSJ Says | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 13 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 13 2018, @11:36AM (8 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 13 2018, @11:36AM (#706577)

    The SEC is also looking into whether Facebook should have told shareholders about Cambridge Analytica's policy violation when it found out in 2015.

    Shareholders? How about users, and all non-users, whose data was gathered and shared?

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by looorg on Friday July 13 2018, @12:03PM

      by looorg (578) on Friday July 13 2018, @12:03PM (#706583)

      Shareholders? How about users, and all non-users, whose data was gathered and shared?

      That was my initial reaction to. But then I realized that we are the merchandise, and you don't tell the cows when you/they are going on a trip to the slaughterhouse. We are not the important once.

    • (Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Friday July 13 2018, @12:42PM

      by AthanasiusKircher (5291) on Friday July 13 2018, @12:42PM (#706592) Journal

      Yeah, obviously. My first reaction was, "Well, if it leads to punishment, it's better than nothing." But I don't hold out hope it will lead to much more than some meaningless fines, if that.

      Of course, in any just world, people should be going to jail... But that's not gonna happen.

    • (Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Friday July 13 2018, @01:14PM

      by NotSanguine (285) <NotSanguineNO@SPAMSoylentNews.Org> on Friday July 13 2018, @01:14PM (#706599) Homepage Journal

      The SEC is also looking into whether Facebook should have told shareholders about Cambridge Analytica's policy violation when it found out in 2015.

      Shareholders? How about users, and all non-users, whose data was gathered and shared?

      If you own a supermarket, do you tell the canned goods about how you're using the inventory? "Users" and others are just product. They have no say. They are only important as commodities to be aggregated and sold. Why would you think Facebook would be any different?

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 13 2018, @01:50PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 13 2018, @01:50PM (#706612)

      Don't worry: the coastguard is looking into what Facebook should have told non-shareholders.

    • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday July 13 2018, @02:07PM (2 children)

      by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Friday July 13 2018, @02:07PM (#706620) Journal

      Are you even daring to suggest that Citizens* somehow compare in value to Shareholders?

      *only US citizens. The other 96 % of the world population doesn't have God given inalienable rights.

      --
      If you eat an entire cake without cutting it, you technically only had one piece.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 13 2018, @02:16PM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 13 2018, @02:16PM (#706624)

        *only US citizens. The other 96 % of the world population doesn't have God given inalienable rights.

        I believe that the US is currently looking into the option of revoking naturalized citizenship. So that 96% number may be going up.

        • (Score: 2) by realDonaldTrump on Saturday July 14 2018, @12:08AM

          by realDonaldTrump (6614) on Saturday July 14 2018, @12:08AM (#706853) Homepage Journal

          It's called denaturalization. And we're not looking into it, we don't need to look into it. It's been looked into. And it was done in the 50s. When America was Great. We stopped it -- why? But we're doing it again. Because of me. We call it Operation Second Look. And it's just what it sounds like. We take another look at our so-called citizens from foreign countries. We look at, did they lie when they applied? And if they lied we put them in jail. Take them to court. And deport them. Our Country is full, we don't have room for liars!!!! #MAGA [twitter.com]

    • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Friday July 13 2018, @05:36PM

      by DeathMonkey (1380) on Friday July 13 2018, @05:36PM (#706709) Journal

      Shareholders? How about users, and all non-users, whose data was gathered and shared?

      Nah, they're allowed to lie to all those folks.

  • (Score: 1, Troll) by realDonaldTrump on Friday July 13 2018, @12:02PM (3 children)

    by realDonaldTrump (6614) on Friday July 13 2018, @12:02PM (#706582) Homepage Journal

    Sub from low-energy obstructionist @martyb sails through. No link to article! Copyright stolen?

(1)