Several News channels such as Channel 4 News, the Guardian and the New York Times have alleged that Cambridge Analytica is responsible for misusing public’s personal data in the Trumps’ political campaign. This is not a true statement according to the Cambridge Analytica. The company had claimed that their detail of accused responses was immensely ignored by the reporters and hence, viewers have only seen the negative side of the company’s participation in Trump’s victory.
They tried to clarify that it was all about misrepresenting the company’s work and misleading the viewers from different states. This activity is done by none other than the company’s own former contractor who has driven absurd comments to media channels and news reporters. Once a time in 2014, an analytical company GSR used to engage with legally providing Facebook data and its derivatives to the Cambridge Analytica. After getting known that CA has been accused of illegally accessing user’s data, GSR had broken the contract with CA.
This happened because the company was not stuck with the data protection regulation. Later, CA had trashed all the Facebook data and derivatives, in a coordination with Facebook. As far as using Facebook data concern, Cambridge Analytica had not used any Facebook data as a part of their services. They had provided the data to U.S presidential campaign supporting Donald Trump. The US media has also claimed that the analytical company has also conveyed personality targeted advertisement for the same political campaign, which is again a false statement according to CA. They had already provided a brief illustration of their accusations since 2016.
The data was used to prepare profiles on American voters so that they could show support for Donald Trump during the presidential election. In order to develop the software to identify the target voters, Cambridge Analytica has hired a Canadian firm Aggregate IQ (AIQ).CA worked with Trump for president campaign in a few key ways. One was data science, one was falling on research and then one was digital marketing. The presidential campaign in many ways is the ultimate startup. The company has considered the fact that the campaign is a multibillion-dollar endeavour that has to go from zero to a thousand in a matter of months and the number of infrastructures, resources and capital that is used during this time is on par even beyond some of the buzzy tech startups in the space.
This represents the need for the increased efficiency in everything that is done. In the beginning, they start with donors and fundraising. Obviously, campaigns need to invest in resources such as an advertisement. In the next process, they analyze the people mindset, understanding who has not yet decided who they are going to vote for, what particular issues they care about and how to best engage with them and then finally get out the vote. Talking to the people they know their supporters, elections are won and lost who actually shows up. So ensuring that those individuals have the tools needed will able to come out in a vote on election day.
CA start working with a Trump campaign in about June of 2016 when it became obvious that a sophisticated data operators would be needed to be able to combat the years of infrastructure and experience the political campaign has been building up. The research looks like going into the field. Collection thousands of survey responses from individuals in targeted battleground states. The research was throughout the period of about 7 days in the field, collecting the responses. At the end of that, that data then matched into their database through which they extract layout, models and predictions based on who they needed to be talking to and finally all these were segmented into various issues they cared about. While simultaneously, when the data will be worked with an extrapolated on throughout the models, the research was back in the field so that their data is always fresh and current and continually reflected the change in the electorate.
Cambridge Analutica’s involvement in the US election for the election of a president who proved to be so divisive among voters and polarizes among voters put an incredibly huge target on their back. Ever since that day although it was a great success in some terms for the company and its business growth, it actually proved to be some doing because from that moment onwards there were actors not least Democrats and liberal media particularly who were determined to destroy Cambridge Analytica and unfortunately they become a target of a sustained press and media attack. Cambridge Analytica wants to couple this incident with the reporting in the UK driven largely by a Carol and the Guardian about their involvement in backstage, which eventually proved to be a false reporting at every level.
After coming to the US they perceived to be the architect of the previous campaign and so they were mollified and hated. Cambridge also targeted an employee saying that “he is extremely jealous and resentful employee who sat there institute for three years as his baby grew and matured and got the success”. He saw this opportunity to go to Carol and share with her every single possible fantastical allegation he comes up with. He received a command from the opposition to put all of these into print so that it went viral on a global scale and make things into a perfect storm. They are the people who public want to hate because of their association with Trump and of full association with political campaigns.
They are affected by some people who are deeply motivated to destroy their organization who is feeding snippets of information and allegations to the major organizations that incredibly influential and powerful. The Guardian and Carol forth it by attacking Cambridge Analytica and proving they had been involved in the referendum and the involvement somehow been illegal. The people of Cambridge Analytica believes that American people can’t accept that Trump is their president and they want to blame someone for that and also the people of Carol looking to use them as a way to turn the outcome of the referendum they don’t agree with.