Facebook referred to EU over suspect tracking methods

The UK’s Information Commissioners Office has referred an investigation into Facebook to the EU’s lead data protection watchdog over concerns about how the internet giant is tracking users.

The investigation, which was initially launched in May 2017, is primarily focused on the Cambridge Analytica scandal, though this might only be the tip of the iceberg for Facebook. Aside from fining the social media giant, the ICO has referred the case to the Irish Data Protection Commission, as the lead supervisory authority for Facebook under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). As you can see below, Cambridge Analytica might only be the beginning of Facebook’s headache.

“Since we began, the scope of our investigation has extended to 30 organisations, we have formally interviewed 33 individuals and are working through forensic analysis of 700 terabytes of data,” said Information Commissioner Elizabeth Denham. “In layman’s terms, that’s the equivalent of 52 billion pages.

“Now I have published a report to Parliament that brings the various strands of our investigation up to date. It sets out what we have found and what we now know. But it is not the end. Some of the issues uncovered in our investigation are still ongoing or will require further investigation or action.”

Those who practise the dark arts of hyper-targeted advertising rarely give explanations as to how what information is being specifically held and how much of a detailed picture is being built up through primary sourced data and third-party sources. Few have a genuine understanding of the complexities of these advertising machines, though this is the foundation of various investigations. Transparency is the key word here, with many wanting the curtain to be pulled aside and the mechanics explained.

The fine is clear evidence the ICO is not happy with the state of affairs, though continuation of the investigation and referral to the EU overlords suggests there are more skeletons to be uncovered in-between Zuckerberg’s V-neck jumpers and starch ironed chinos.

“We have referred our ongoing concerns about Facebook’s targeting functions and techniques that are used to monitor individuals’ browsing habits, interactions and behaviour across the internet and different devices to the to the IDPC,” said Denham.

The initial focus of the investigation might have been political influence, though the more details which emerge, the less comfortable pro-privacy bureaucrats in Brussels are likely to feel. Regulating the slippery Silicon Valley natives has always been a tricky job, but with the Facebook advertising machine becoming increasingly exposed, the rulebook governing the data sharing economy might well be in need of a refresh.

Facebook says sharing is increasingly going private

While announcing another solid set of numbers, Facebook revealed that sharing is increasingly moving to private channels.

This presents some business challenges for Facebook as monetising services such as instant messaging has proven to be more difficult than just slapping ads in the middle of public streams. As a consequence Facebook’s share price fluctuated a fair bit during the earnings call on the back of knee-jerk reactions from investors.

“Public sharing will always be very important, but people increasingly want to share privately too — and that includes both to smaller audiences with messaging, and ephemerally with stories,” said Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg in a public Facebook post. “People feel more comfortable being themselves when they know their content will only be seen by a smaller group and when their content won’t stick around forever. Messaging and stories make up the vast majority of growth in the sharing that we’re seeing.

Now, it’s worth noting that one of the main reasons people prefer our services — especially WhatsApp — is because of its stronger record on privacy. WhatsApp is completely end-to-end encrypted, does not store your messages, and doesn’t store the keys to your messages in China or anywhere else. This is important because if our systems can’t see your messages, then that means governments and bad actors won’t be able to access them through us either.”

It’s very interesting that Zuck chose to attribute such importance to privacy. There have, of course, been all sorts of panics this year around data privacy, with the Cambridge Analytica scandal still clearly fresh in Zuck’s mind. People are rightly more aware than ever of the implications of publishing their personal stuff on the internet and it’s possible that we may have reached peak social media sharing.

Another contributing factor may be the increasing likelihood of being permanently banned from social media platforms for posting content that falls fowl of increasingly broad censorship parameters. Most recently Facebook has taken down accounts associated with conservative activist group The Proud Boys and it seems likely that the move to private messaging is influenced by fear of being banned.

Zuck noted that a lot of this private sharing happens over platforms he owns – Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp – but censorship attention has now moved to his other main property: Instagram. The Daily Beast, NYT, and Verge have all written recently about how much horridness there is on Instagram and how shouldn’t be tolerated. As public sharing becomes increasingly risky, this move to private is likely to accelerate.

Facebook is said to be shopping for a security company

The social network giant Facebook is speculated to be close to acquiring a cybersecurity company to shore up its of data protection capability.

In the wake of a massive security breach, when 29 million users’ data were compromised, Facebook is desperately scrambling for a quick and effective solution. As it emerges, one way of doing so, in addition to working with the FBI, is shopping. The Information reported that according to four separate sources, Facebook has approached several unidentified cybersecurity companies for acquisition. One source told the online technology publication that a deal with one of the target companies could be reached before the end of the year.

A professional security solution sourced from outside could help refresh Facebook’s internal measures that might have overlooked vulnerabilities. The leak in late September, which initially was thought to have affected up to 50 million users, resulted from a coding loophole in the “View As” feature, which was attacked by an unknown party disguised as a 3rd-party marketing company. Facebook later clarified that about 30 million users actually had their access tokens stolen, but the attackers failed to gather information on 1 million of them.

On top of the technical expertise to be acquired, a high-profile purchase of a security company would also improve the perception that Facebook is serious about safeguarding user data. The company’s reputation has been repeatedly battered since the Cambridge Analytica scandal, prompting it to go more aggressive with its PR strategy. After recruiting a high calibre ex-politician to its team, adding a professional security solution to its toolkit would do no harm.

 

Facebook bags former UK Deputy PM as lobbyist in chief

Former MP Sir Nick Clegg has joined Facebook to take over as VP of Global Affairs and Communications. In other words, it’s chief lobbyist.

The appointment is certainly an interesting one. Having led the Liberal Democrats (the political form of irrelevance) from 2007 to 2015, and served as Deputy Prime Minister in the coalition government under Prime Minister David Cameron, Clegg was defeated in his constituency of Sheffield Hallam by the Labour representative.

“Having spoken at length to Mark and Sheryl over the last few months, I have been struck by their recognition that the company is on a journey which brings new responsibilities not only to the users of Facebook’s apps but to society at large,” said Clegg in a Facebook post. “I hope I will be able to play a role in helping to navigate that journey.”

Based out of California, the hire could be an clever move for Facebook. Clegg, despite being as inspirational as scrambled eggs, has plenty of experience of the political ping pong, most crucially as a Member of the European Parliament for East Midlands between 1999 and 2004, and a position as a European Commission trade negotiator. Being one of the most stringent regulatory markets on the planet, having Clegg’s European experience is certainly a bonus.

The issue which Facebook might face in hiring Clegg is the weight which he carries. Being leader of the Liberal Democrats and Deputy Prime Minister might look good to US corporates on the CV, but the reality might be a bit different. The Liberal Democrats are a featherweight presence in British politics, and while Clegg did lead the party to the weighty presence of 57 seats in the House of Commons, he also led them off a cliff to eight in the following General Election during 2015. Clegg left politics rather sheepishly and without leaving any real legacy or memory.

Unfortunately for Facebook, the UK is one of the markets where Clegg will be most needed. With CEO Mark Zuckerberg under threat of a summons after repeatedly ignoring calls to appear before a Parliamentary Select Committee, someone needs to calm the UK waters. With the neither the Conservative or the Labour party holding in him in particularly high regard, it might be more of a beg mission than lobbying.

“Our company is on a critical journey,” Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg wrote in a separate post. “The challenges we face are serious and clear and now more than ever we need new perspectives to help us though this time of change.

“The opportunities are clear too. Every day people use our apps to connect with family and friends and make a difference in their communities. If we can honor the trust they put in us and live up to our responsibilities, we can help more people use technology to do good. That’s what motivates our teams and from all my conversations with Nick, it’s clear that he believes in this as well. His experience and ability to work through complex issues will be invaluable in the years to come.”

Change is certainly on the horizon for Facebook. With numerous scandals plaguing the business, and the threat of a GDPR fine following the most recent data breach, the team will have to carefully manage the Gaggle of Red-tapers in Brussels. Europe already the most stringent data protection and privacy rules worldwide, and it would be no surprise to see those tightened further. Clegg certainly has an interesting couple of months ahead.

Shareholders start wrestling Zuckerberg for Facebook control

Five Facebook shareholders are fighting back against Mark Zuckerberg’s control of the company he founded after several scandals have plummeted share price.

Citing privacy outrages, political influence, the proliferation of fake news and data leaks, the asset managers are hoping to raise support to remove Zuckerberg as Chairman. The reputation and credibility of Facebook as a business which can effectively operate in the digital economy has certainly been called into question, though considering Zuckerberg himself control 60% of the Facebook voting rights, it might prove to be a difficult battle.

New York City Pension Funds, Illinois state treasurer Michael Frerichs, Rhode Island state treasurer Seth Magaziner, Pennsylvania treasurer Joe Torsella, and Trillium Asset Management are the troublesome shareholders, though the filing should be viewed as nothing more than symbolic. With Zuckerberg’s control over Facebook coming close to a dictatorship, it is unlikely anything will change. That will not prevent investors from complaining however.

At the time of writing, the Facebook share price was standing at $159, having started the year at $181 and reaching a peak of $271 in July. This is the lowest since July 2017, a period which has seen Facebook get grilled by politicians over fake news and political influence, Cambridge Analytica dragging the company down and data breaches leaking personal information to nefarious actors. While Facebook will always be a target for hackers and the bottom-dwellers of the internet, the shareholders are calling into question Zuckerberg’s ability to manage the business.

“Facebook plays an outsized role in our society and our economy,” said New York City Comptroller Scott Stringer. “They have a social and financial responsibility to be transparent – that’s why we’re demanding independence and accountability in the company’s boardroom.

“We need Facebook’s insular boardroom to make a serious commitment to addressing real risks – reputational, regulatory, and the risk to our democracy – that impact the company, its shareowners, and ultimately the hard-earned pensions of thousands of New York City workers. An independent board chair is essential to moving Facebook forward from this mess, and to re-establish trust with Americans and investors alike.”

This is not the first time Zuckerberg has faced a challenge to his reign. Three of the aforementioned funds also supported a proposal in 2017 to create an independent board, though many of the largest shareholders voted against the proposal. This new filing, which also suggests the creation of an independent board chair to improve oversight, is set to feature at the 2019 AGM, with the troublesome shareholders stating they will be drumming up support over the coming months.

What is worth noting is this is not a revolutionary idea. Most other companies, especially multinationals, appoint an independent board to oversee operations and maintain transparency for shareholders. It is common business practice. Perhaps the steamroller success of Facebook and the continuous supply of profits have convinced shareholders this is not necessary at Facebook, but the declining share price is certainly something to worry about. Facebook is under pressure from numerous different governments, consumer groups and regulators, and Zuckerberg doesn’t seem to want to do much about it.

The UK is an excellent example of inaction from Zuckerberg. After ignoring numerous calls to appear in-front of a Parliamentary committee, the UK Government has threatened Zuckerberg with a summons should he ever set foot in the country again. It is difficult to imagine any other multi-national business taking this approach to criticism and condemnation.

While the filing might be nothing more than a PR statement, it is clear the shareholders are not happy with the way Zuckerberg is running the business. Unfortunately, it might appear the socially-incompetent Zuckerberg is under little pressure to do anything about it considering his voting power. Ironically, the social media giant seems the closest thing to a dictatorship the US has to offer the world.

TIP offers start-ups a new way into the telco business

With internet traffic continuing to accelerate and innovation starting to stagnate, new ideas are needed to stimulate the telco industry. For the Telecom Infra Project team, start-ups could be the answer.

There have of course been numerous examples of start-ups disrupting an industry or creating an entirely new segment. Think of WhatsApp impact on the world of messaging or Netflix on content delivery, though navigating the waters of the telco industry can be a rough ride for start-ups. Few achieve the recognition their ideas deserve, possibly to the detriment of the industry.

“If the big players would buy them [start-ups] at a time when there is a product and they acquire them not to kill the product it would be okay,” said Axel Clauberg, VP of IP End to End & Infrastructure Cloud at Deutsche Telekom and Chairman of the Board at TIP. “We saw a couple of positive examples where it happened in the past, however many good ideas just don’t make it to that stage because when people start running a company and want to get funding by approaching a venture capitalist, suggesting their market is telco, the answer is no, sorry.”

“We were routinely being approached by start-ups who had really innovative ideas, but they were running out of money really quickly,” said Aaron Bernstein, Director, Connectivity Ecosystem Programs at Facebook and a TIP Board Member. “It was impossible for them to get the attention of VCs, and it really comes down to how do they go from zero to dollars as quickly as possible. That is what led to the creation of the TIP Ecosystem Accelerator Centre programme. How do we connect VCs who are interested in infrastructure with start-ups and operators who can create the idea of coaching to get them from zero to dollars much quicker.”

The TIP Ecosystem Acceleration Centre (TEAC) programme is an initiative which looks to creative the wrongs of telco life and bring new innovation into the fray. Several of the world’s largest Telecom Service Providers are hosting TEACs in the UK (BT), Paris (Orange), Seoul (SK Telecom) and Germany (DT), with the aim of creating breakthrough technologies that reimagine telecom infrastructure. TIP is an initiative which is all about doing something different to stimulate innovation, and accessing untapped ideas in the start-ups is certainly one way to go about.

Whether it is the procurement cycle, the cut-throat nature of acquisition or simply running out of funds, gaining traction in the telco world is an incredibly difficult task for start-ups. Perhaps this is the reason the industry moves at such a sluggish pace compared to the internet players of Silicon Valley who embrace the concept of start-ups, but for a healthier ecosystem, all ideas need to be taken into account.

For the moment, the TEACs are small scale, but every idea has to start somewhere. Start-ups could be the saving grace the telco world needs to stimulate innovation and recapture lost revenues, but the ecosystem has to change to embrace them.

TIP 2018: what’s in it for Facebook?

At the Telecom Infra Project Summit 2018 we spoke to the Facebook execs behind the initiative to find out why they decided to get involved.

When Facebook first started talking about getting involved in in the telecoms industry via TIP and even developing novel wireless technologies such as Terragraph, it felt like a frustrated OTT going through the motions to light a fire under the sector. Facebook’s vested interest was clear: the better and more ubiquitous the connectivity, the more people will use Facebook.

As we explained earlier, a big part of this involves efforts to make telecoms infrastructure cheaper to buy, roll-out and maintain. In that respect TIP is a direct threat to the traditional big kit vendors, not only because tower networking costs probably equate to lower profits for them, but a major aim of TIP is to expand the whole telecoms ecosystem, thus creating additional competition for them.

In a couple of small media gatherings at the event we spoke to Jay Parikh, Head of Engineering and Infrastructure at Facebook, and VP of connectivity Yael Maguire. Parikh explained that TIP is not just a product of Facebook’s own connectivity needs but also of conversations he was having with operators two or three years ago in which they implored Facebook to get involved.

The biggest mutual problem faced by Facebook and the operator community is the exponential growth in traffic over networks combined with the increasing difficulty and cost of providing it. “We were worried that innovation was slowing down,” said Parikh, in reference to the collective concern felt at the time, one which the big kit vendors were failing to sufficiently address.

In response to persistent questioning about the return Facebook expects to get on its significant (but unspecified) investment, Parikh insisted that this isn’t a short term thing for his company. The strategic objective is to catalyse the telecoms industry and ROI will be gauged by the presence of novel connectivity innovation, as opposed to direct financial considerations.

It’s easy to be sceptical any time a company claims to be doing something for the greater good, but equally this would be a strange area for Facebook to diversify into if it was only looking for a new profit centre. Having said that the world’s dominant etailer now makes much of its profit from its cloud business so you never know.

Parikh kept his cards pretty close to his chest regarding any TIP financial metrics but it’s relatively easy to believe that a cash-rich Silicon Valley company might be prepared to spend money a bit more speculatively than a traditional outfit. Facebook considered its own fortunes to be intrinsically allied to those of the global telecoms industry, so helping it innovate is viewed as sufficiently self-interested by itself, for now at least.

When asked what the top priorities are for Facebook from TIP, Parikh cited the connectivity insights programme, which aims to give operators additional data to help operators make informed decisions derived, in part, from anonymised Facebook user data. Rural access work is also important as Facebook seeks its next billion users, and Telefónica’s work in Peru was cited as an example of this.

The third priority is Terragraph, which is positioned as an alternative to fixed wireless access delivered over unlicensed 60 GHz spectrum, of which there is plenty, with an emphasis on backhauling wifi. This is a key concern of Maguire’s, who noted that average video speeds are declining across the board thanks to the aforementioned imbalance between demand and supply.

Maguire explained that Terragraph started as a project designed to look into the viability of using the 60 GHz spectrum for backhaul. At such a high frequency there are a bunch of propagation challenges, with even oxygen itself contributing to signal degradation. But it turns out that if you get the precise line of sight alignment right and don’t try to transmit any further than 200m, then it can be used in much the same way we’re talking about FWA over mm wave for 5G.

In keeping with Facebook’s general tone on this stuff Maguire played down any direct antagonism between Terragraph and mm wave FWA, insisting they just wanted to offer up alternatives. I was also keen to stress that this technology is specifically intended for high bandwidth wireless backhaul. “It’s not a solves all problems technology,” he said.

So, in summary, Facebook says it’s not looking for any immediate return from its involvement and investment in TIP. Instead it expects to benefit from the telecoms industry innovating as a faster pace than it would have if Facebook hadn’t decided to get involved. Aside from justifiable scepticism about any company being so sanguine about immediate, demonstrable ROI there’s little reason not to take Facebook at face value on this, while also keeping a watchful eye out for mission creep as things progress.

A simple explanation of TIP – making connectivity cheaper

The Telecom Infra Project has gotten a huge amount of attention since its launch, mainly due to the Facebook brand, but why is it so important? It’s all about bringing connectivity to everyone, equally.

This might sound like PR propaganda, but it is true. Facebook wants to make sure connectivity is fair and equal for everyone in the world, ensuring the digital lifestyle extends beyond developed nations and into the ignored territories. Like the army of Mormons spreading the word of Joseph Smith, Facebook is attempting to spread its own form of enlightenment; connectivity.

Again, this might sound like a corporate giant trying to cover up nefarious objectives with a light and fluffy initiative but this is a genuine mission. It does have a tie back to the profit and loss column for Facebook, but what do you expect, Mark Zuckerberg is not the CEO of a charity.

In the simplest of terms, there are two objectives for TIP. Firstly, decouple hardware and software to bring down the price of connectivity infrastructure. This will, in theory, accelerate the rollout of said infrastructure into the regions were ROI has been hard to find. Secondly, open up black boxes in developed markets to improve the quality of connectivity. Both of these objectives are about improving the experience of the internet for all, providing an equal connectivity experience for the masses.

“We need to innovate at the speed of software upgrades not hardware replacement cycles,” said Telefonica’s David Del Val Latorre, one of the TIP Board members.

It does sound too good to be true, but you have to understand the Facebook business model. Unlike it neighbours in Silicon Valley, Facebook has not been the most successful when it comes to diversification. Almost every dollar flowing back to Zuckerberg’s piggy back is derived from the walled garden advertising business model. Facebook captures the audience on its platform, and then charges third-parties to access them. It is an incredibly successful business model, but it has its limitations; you can only serve so many adverts to one person. For Facebook’s rise to continue, new users need to be found.

Facebook’s Next Billion Users initiative is a perfect example of this. With developing markets approaching an advertising glass ceiling, new users need to be found to fuel the advertising machine. For this to happen, connectivity infrastructure needs to be rolled out into the regions where it isn’t. To tackle these tough environments and regions of low-ARPU, new connectivity solutions need to be developed to offer the telcos ROI. Hence TIP.

Of course Facebook is not on its own. Del Val Latorre is leading the TIP and Telefonica efforts to being OpenRAN to South America and connect an additional 100 million customers. Vodafone is doing the same in India and claims to be able to lower TCO by 30% for certain projects. There are now nine community labs around the world, including two in Brazil, and an additional seven field projects. Deutsche Telekom is running its own project in Hungary. Even Nokia has a member on the board, despite the TIP mission destroying part of its own business model. Ericsson isn’t a member though…

Of course, “this is not a Facebook thing, we are one member,” Jay Parikh, Head of Engineering and Infrastructure at Facebook, reminded the audience.

The TIP mission statement might sound like something out of a cheesy PR playbook, and this might be the case, but it is being genuine.

TIP 2018 is a wakeup call for the big kit vendors

The third Telecom Infra Project (TIP) Summit marked an further attempt by operators and Facebook to accelerate the development of the telecoms industry.

In his opening keynote Axel Clauberg, TIP Chairman and VP of technology innovation at Deutsche Telekom, was careful to stress that the big kit vendors are an important part of the telecoms ecosystem. But most of the discussions that followed on the first day of the 2018 TIP Summit was focused on fixing a telecoms kit market that TIP participants clearly feel is underperforming.

Clauberg spoke about the persistent exponential growth in data traffic that is set to continue for the foreseeable future. He stressed that, while he’s not saying kit vendors don’t do enough, the industry collectively needs to do better. The clear inference is that if we leave it to the incumbent vendors things won’t move quickly enough.

A lot of what this comes down to is putting into practice all the worthy talk of agility, devops, etc that everyone agrees is a great idea in principle. Through a network of ‘community labs’ minimum viable products are built and deployed. The message is that the traditional constraints imposed by the protracted standardisation process and exhaustive testing just won’t cut it anymore and telecoms needs to get a bit more Silicon Valley in its approach,

This seems to be where Facebook comes in. One of its core strategic needs is active user growth and it it’s running out of opportunities to do that in developed markets. So its quest for ‘the next billion’ is heavily dependent on improving access to connectivity in less developed regions. This requires some new thinking on both the technological and commercial fronts.

So TIP claims to be all about novel thinking, rapid turnaround and expanding the telecoms ecosystem to a broader range of players, including startups that traditionally find it hard to engage with operators, via its TEAC programme. The general aim seems to be to open up the whole ecosystem via things like open interfaces such that it undergoes a transformation equivalent to the computer industry a generation ago. Its all about more players, more choice and more flexibility.

You can see a summary of its many working groups below, which illustrates how broad its ambitions are. Another speaker said TIP reckons it can bring about a 30% reduction in total cost of ownership of running a network. This saving will ultimately come of if the pockets of the big kit vendors. Nokia is a TIP member but there’s no sign yet of Ericsson and Huawei, for whom the very existence of TIP poses some serious existential questions.

TIP 2018 working groups

Facebook and Twitter coordinate once more over censorship

Facebook recently removed hundreds of accounts for ‘inauthentic’ behaviour and many of those affected have also seen their Twitter accounts suspended.

In a press release entitled ‘Removing Additional Inauthentic Activity from Facebook’, Facebook explained that its doesn’t like inauthentic behaviour, by which it means accounts that seek to mislead people about their real identities and/or objectives. While there is some concern that this could be driven by the desire to influence politics, Facebook reckons it’s mostly ‘clickbait’, designed to drive and then monetise internet traffic.

“And like the politically motivated activity we’ve seen, the ‘news’ stories or opinions these accounts and pages share are often indistinguishable from legitimate political debate,” said the release. “This is why it’s so important we look at these actors’ behaviour – such as whether they’re using fake accounts or repeatedly posting spam – rather than their content when deciding which of these accounts, pages or groups to remove.”

So Facebook is not saying it’s the arbiter of ‘authentic’ speech, which is very wise as that would put it in a highly compromised position. Instead it’s taking action against people posting political content via supposedly fake accounts or who are seen to generate spam. It seems to be hoping this will allow it to remove certain accounts that focus on political content without being accused of political meddling or bias.

All this context and preamble was offered to set up the big reveal, which is that Facebook has removed 559 Pages and 251 accounts that have broken its rules against spam and coordinated inauthentic behaviour. It looks like the timing of this renewed purge is influenced by the imminent US mid-term elections, with Facebook keen to avoid a repetition of claims made during the Cambridge Analytica scandal that it facilitated political meddling by allowing too much of this sort of thing to take place during the last US general election.

Of course Facebook is free to quality control its platform as much as it likes, but if it is seen to lack neutrality and objectivity in so doing, it runs the risk of alienating those of its users that feel discriminated against. In this case the loudest dissent seems to be coming from independent media, some of which feel they have been mistakenly identified as clickbaiters.

The Washington Post spoke to ‘Reasonable People Unite’, which was shut down by Facebook, but which claims to be legitimate (let alone authentic). Meanwhile Reason.com reckons libertarian publishers were targeted and spoke to the founder of The Free Thought Project, who also found himself banned in spite of claimed legitimacy.

Matt Agorist, who writes for The Free Thought Project, tweeted the following, and his subsequent piece indicated that his employer had also been removed from Twitter. This seems to be another manifestation (Alex Jones having been the most high-profile previous case) of coordinated activity between the two sites that, together with YouTube, dominate public debate in the US. A number of other publishers removed by Facebook seem now to have been suspended by Twitter.

Other independent journalists have joined the outcry, including Caitlin Johnstone and Tim Pool in the video below. The latter makes the point that many of those purged seem to be left-leaning, which at least balances the previous impression that right-leaning commentators were being disproportionately targeted, and that many of the accounts taken down may well have been guilty as charged. But the inherent subjectivity involved in determining the relative legitimacy of small publishers is a problem that is only amplified by this latest move.

It seems unlikely that the primary objective of these social media giants is to impose their world view via the censorship of content they disagree with, but this kind of coordinated banning does feel like unilateral speech policing and that should be of concern, regardless of your political position. Twitter doesn’t even seem to have made any public statements on the matter. Meanwhile the range of views considered ‘authentic’ by these private companies seems to be narrowing by the day.