Once you decide to remove someone, who do you decide to remove and why? Are there any other factors that control your decision?
“Facebook Removes Accounts Linked to Duterte’s Former Social-Media Manager,” The Wall Street Journal, March 30, 2018. Accounts removed for “coordinated inauthentic behavior.”
As the platform owner, you can either open your site to all comers, or establish objective standards to limit who may and may not use your platform. Are there risks if your standards aren’t sufficiently objective, and a tinge of subjectivity creeps in?
Governance (to the extent you establish objective standards, and decide who you let “in”), and Information, and Compliance (to the extent you kick people off). But are there other controls on your decisions, when you become a large social platform?
“The Final Minutes of Ethiopian Airlines’ Doomed Boeing 737 MAX,” The Wall Street Journal, March 30, 2019. What the cockpit voice recorder captured in the tragic crash.
What Information do we collect, and why? How do we Use that? Would we collect this information even if the government didn’t require it?
“Johnson & Johnson to Air First TV Ad for Drug That Discloses Its Price,” The Wall Street Journal, March 29, 2019. Ads to disclose monthly cost, both before and after insurance. Posting a list price!
Isn’t refreshing to have a marketer tell you up front what the cost will be? Isn’t that information you’d like to have in your decision-making process? Does this demonstrate that the seller is thinking of you differently than other sellers are?
If you’re a competing manufacturer, what does your response or non-response say? Has J&J raised the bar of what information the consumer expects?
This is just Information and Use; I couldn’t really concoct a Governance or Compliance aspect, other than some thoughts about whether the recent $775 million settlement in litigation over the drug at issue factored in.
“Huawei Equipment Has Major Security Flaws, U.K. Says,” The Wall Street Journal, March 29, 2019. Absence of company-wide security practices at issue.
This one would send you scrambling for your crisis management manual. What happens when the US government says your product has a security defect?
It’s not really possible to manage what the US government says about you. How is this information being used? How do you manage the consequences? Is this just a part of the China-US trade spat? How do you deal with your customers? How do your customers react?
Maybe a slight departure from the normal focus of this blog. But involves having the right processes (Governance) and complying with those processes (Compliance). And a bit of Use and Information.
“HUD Action Against Facebook Signals Trouble for Other Platforms,” The Wall Street Journal, March 29, 2019. Do ads targeting specific races/religions constitute discrimination?
How does Facebook use the information it has collected? Can advertisers on Facebook pick which users get their ads, and restrict others from seeing those ads? Could the ad be directed at one race of users and not another, or one age, or one ethnic group, or one religion? Google got a party invite as well.
“The allegations against Facebook amount to a modern spin on redlining, or the historic practice by some real-estate brokers, lenders and others of drawing red lines around low-income and minority neighborhoods and either denying services, or targeting them with higher rates.”
And what does it mean when, in the space of a week, three different agencies of the federal government have taken action in this space? First, the FTC with broadband providers. Then the SEC with the PII in a database. And now this. Is there an Invisible Hand at work?
“Workers Push Back as Companies Gather Fingerprints and Retina Scans,” The Wall Street Journal, March 28, 2019. State statutes provide workers and others additional rights.
Fingerprints and facial scans are information, just as much as a tax return. There are limits on how much a business can “capture” from you, and what that business can do with that information. In Illinois, and perhaps other states in the near future, employees and customers can sue if the employer hasn’t taken the right steps.
So, there’s Information. There’s Governance (by the government and, perhaps, by a business), and Use, and Compliance. This one hits on all four.
[Thanks, Judy. I would have gotten here; just takes some time. Ed.]
“Equifax, FICO Team Up to Sell Consumer Data to Banks,” The Wall Street Journal, March 28, 2019. The headline says it all.
Who owns data about you, and what can others do with “your” data? Do we as consumers just accept this?
Is it all information about us, and is it all private? No. If you buy a car or a computer or a gallon of gas, the other party knows a lot about that transaction, and apart from our identity, do we really care what they do with the rest of that? It is when they link that data to us that the situation changes. But the data would be worth a whole lot less if it weren’t matched to a specific identified individual (i.e., you).
How do and should we, and by that I mean all of us, Govern this? Maybe the EU had a pretty good idea.