Australia Takes Facebook to Court Over Privacy Violations

Facebook logo

Australia’s privacy regulator is taking Facebook to court over Cambridge Analytica. It could impose a fine of AUD$1.7 million (US$1.1 million) for every privacy violation.

“Facebook failed to take reasonable steps to protect those individuals’ personal information from unauthorised disclosure,” the Australian commissioner’s office said.

Big companies like Facebook need fines in the billions of dollars for them to start paying attention.

Check It Out: Australia Takes Facebook to Court Over Privacy Violations

One thought on “Australia Takes Facebook to Court Over Privacy Violations

  • Thanks, Andrew. Token Australian here. Had to comment on this. Fines are just cost of doing business to these companies. The ethics of the likes of facebook not identifying advertising for their users are addressed at the end of this… rant.

    I’m pretty sure the participants in the Cambridge Analytica knew they were giving up personal information when they accepted payment to participate – unless they didn’t read the terms&conditions. “Friends” of the participants that feel aggrieved just don’t understand what social networking is… to the companies that supply the services IN EXCHANGE for user information.

    Cambridge Analytica was (and even more-so now… still is, though they won’t say it) facebook’s biggest success story. They even hired someone from Cambridge Analytica to tell others how to replicate the model and only fired him when the advertising it spawned became controversial. Facebook also has at least one scientifically documented case bragging that they can sway elections with advertising. It is, after all, the job of an advertising company to influence thinking, most especially in elections – as legitimised by the billions spent by political parties on what is THE biggest advertising bonanza in the US, for both advertising companies and media outlets.

    Remember also, that the mainstream profile of the Cambridge Analytica shenanigans is more about shutting down a competitor by the cosy club of media/dominant political parties that existed before the internet, than out of any concern for citizens. Otherwise it would have been just another tech outrage and blown over.

    As for users having to treat their feeds like any other advertising and Question Everything. It’s common sense, more so on the internet, and especially when using services provided by companies that make their money passing off advertising as their service, like Google and Facebook. And frankly, it is with some reluctance that I have to agree with the policy of Emperor Zuck, that people need to see the lies political advertisers of all persuasions are putting about – because their methods tell us more about the advertisers than they do about the message.

    As for the side-issue/oxymoron of truth in advertising (Diet Coke, you’re going to drink it just for the taste of it), all that is needed is something indicating what is paid advertising! That’s TRUTH in advertising. (see what that does for mainstream media’s Native Advertising business as well as internet stealth advertising models) That makes it abundantly clear to the user… to beware. See if you can get that legislation through! Perhaps an Advertisement EMOJI could be the only useful emoji besides the smiley.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

WIN an iPhone 15 Pro Max!

Enter our epic giveaway for a chance to win the latest iPhone 15 Pro Max!