Sign up for our daily briefing

Make your busy days simpler with Axios AM/PM. Catch up on what's new and why it matters in just 5 minutes.

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Catch up on coronavirus stories and special reports, curated by Mike Allen everyday

Catch up on coronavirus stories and special reports, curated by Mike Allen everyday

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Denver news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Denver

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Des Moines news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Des Moines

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Minneapolis-St. Paul news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Twin Cities

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Tampa Bay news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Tampa Bay

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Charlotte news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Charlotte

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg. Photo: Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call via Getty Images

In the latest barrage of Facebook privacy news, a fresh report from the New York Times on Tuesday night suggested that Facebook gave its partners even wider access to more user data (including private messages) for a longer time than previously known — and then, Wednesday, the District of Columbia’s attorney general sued Facebook over a slew of privacy complaints.

Why it matters: Silicon Valley insiders have a pretty thick skin when it comes to how much tech companies know about their users and how much they share with partners. Even still, Tuesday's revelations were a shock.

The Times report found that, among other things:

  • Netflix and Spotify had access to users' private messages (Netflix says it never asked for or used the access). It was granted presumably to allow sharing of what media they were consuming, but the access could have allowed far more.
  • Microsoft had access, unbeknownst to Facebook users, to see the names of all a user's friends.
  • Even as Facebook stopped broadly sharing certain user data with partners. It maintains it allowed not only hardware makers, but also companies like Yahoo and Amazon, expanded access.
  • As recently as 2017, Facebook was sharing user data with Yandex, the Russian search service. (Ukraine has accused it of feeding info to the Kremlin.)

The other side: Facebook classified most of these partnerships as "service providers," and maintained the relationships were therefore exempt from rules designed to prevent unauthorized data sharing that Facebook accepted as part of a consent decree with the Federal Trade Commission in 2011. The FTC isn't commenting.

Facebook responded in a blog post last night.

  • It said that all the sharing reported by the Times was authorized by individual users who linked apps to Facebook or opted in to its personalization services.

The takeaway: It's not clear that any of the partners misused the data. In many cases it's not even clear they wanted the broad access they received. Rather, Facebook appears so focused on growth that it didn't make the effort to create tools that limited access to specifically what the partners needed.

The big picture: Users have spent much of 2018 trying to weigh whether the benefits of social media — chiefly, maintaining connections with friends — outweigh the privacy cost. But each day fresh evidence piles up in the cost column even as the benefits have held steady.

Yes, but: The saving grace for Facebook remains that there's really no credible alternative with the same scale. The choice is to use Facebook and accept the risks, or miss out on the benefits entirely.

  • This need not be the equation forever. At this point, it's not a question of whether many Facebook users wouldn't leap at — and even pay for — an alternative, but rather whether anyone can replicate Facebook's scale and reach.

Our thought bubble: Facebook's FTC settlement was in 2011. That's seven years during which the company was on legal and public notice to watch its step when it comes to protecting user data.

  • Everything in this story (on top of all the other issues/stories 2018 has brought us about Facebook's cavalier approach to user data) suggests that Facebook simply did not prioritize protecting users' information over cementing business relationships.

Go deeper

Off the Rails

Episode 7: Trump turns on Pence

Photo illustration: Eniola Odetunde/Axios. Photos: Elijah Nouvelage, Alex Wong/Getty Images

Beginning on election night 2020 and continuing through his final days in office, Donald Trump unraveled and dragged America with him, to the point that his followers sacked the U.S. Capitol with two weeks left in his term. Axios takes you inside the collapse of a president with a special series.

Episode 7: Trump turns on Pence. Trump believes the vice president can solve all his problems by simply refusing to certify the Electoral College results. It's a simple test of loyalty: Trump or the U.S. Constitution.

"The end is coming, Donald."

The male voice in the TV ad boomed through the White House residence during "Fox & Friends" commercial breaks. Over and over and over. "The end is coming, Donald. ... On Jan. 6, Mike Pence will put the nail in your political coffin."

Big Tech's post-riot reckoning

Photo illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios. Photo: Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images

The Capitol insurrection means the anti-tech talk in Washington is more likely to lead to action, since it's ever clearer that the attack was planned, at least in part, on social media.

Why it matters: The big platforms may have hoped they'd move to D.C.'s back burner, with the Hill focused on the Biden agenda and the pandemic out of control. But now, there'll be no escaping harsh scrutiny.

28 mins ago - Technology

Why domestic terrorists are so hard to police online

Illustration: Eniola Odetunde/Axios

Domestic terrorism has proven to be more difficult for Big Tech companies to police online than foreign terrorism.

The big picture: That's largely because the politics are harder. There's more unity around the need to go after foreign extremists than domestic ones — and less danger of overreaching and provoking a backlash.

You’ve caught up. Now what?

Sign up for Mike Allen’s daily Axios AM and PM newsletters to get smarter, faster on the news that matters.

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!