Cambridge Analytica 'privatised colonising operation', not a 'legitimate business', says whistleblowerChris Wylie makes explosive allegations in session with MPs
By Rebecca Hill 28 Mar 2018 at 05:58
Working for Cambridge Analytica "felt very much like a privatised colonising operation," the former staffer at the centre of the scandal around Facebook data slurps and Vote Leave's alleged overspend has said.
Speaking to MPs today, Chris Wylie, the pink-haired whistleblower with a knack for flamboyant and quotable phrases, made a series of explosive allegations that ranged from the believable to the stuff of conspiracy theorists.
It was less than 10 minutes into a three-hour hearing in front of the UK's House of Commons Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee before the session descended into what can only be described as lurid gossip about the death of Wylie's predecessor, Dan Muresa.
Wylie, who acknowledged he was repeating no more than pure speculation, told MPs that Muresa was poisoned in his hotel room after a deal went sour and that police were bribed not to enter for 24 hours.
The session - which committee chair Damian Collins said was the longest single-panel hearing they’d held - was part of the committee's inquiry into fake news, but has become subsumed by the ongoing controversy surrounding apps' use of Facebook users' data for military-style psy-ops.
The encounter, held just as the committee was knocked back by Zuck, saw star witness Wylie level a series of allegations about his the former company, its parent biz SCL Group and another political advertising biz, AggregateIQ, which he broadly accused of behaving unethically.
He also claimed that a coordinated effort between groups campaigning for the UK to leave the EU (which have been accused of over-spending) had swayed the result of the referendum.
Wylie said his reasons for coming clean was that he didn’t think “military style information operations is conducive for any democratic process, whether a US presidential or a local council race.”
When asked if he wanted to bring the companies he had worked for down, he replied: "Frankly, yes. Nothing good has come from Cambridge Analytica. It's not a legitimate business. SCL is not a legitimate business. So, yes, I don't think they should remain in business."
Summarising his feelings about the companies and execs, Wylie said that they don’t care whether or what they do is legal, as long as it gets the job done.
'There are a lot of reasons I find the company problematic'
His politically charged statements included that the business was “an example of what modern-day colonialism looks like,” alleging that it uses coercion and methods well beyond simple psychological profiling of Facebook users, to influence campaigns around the world.
Wylie said that Nix had a standard pitch that relied on his company’s Mayfair offices and his Eton education, which presents a very posh veneer and plays well in the Commonwealth countries the business targets.
“[It’s] a wealthy company from a developed nation going into an economy or democracy that’s still struggling to get on its feet on the ground and taking advantage of that to profit from it,” he said. “There are a lot of reasons I find the company problematic… It’s not just the data.”
Later in the session, Wylie said that part of SCL’s business model was to “capture a government” in such a way that it had access to ministers.
After that, they could start exploiting relationships and the fact that there’s not a lot of oversight in some African countries to introduce minsters to a company, so they made a deal and get a cut of that deal, Wylie recounted. The key thing, he said, was “you have to have your guy in power first.”
Cambridge Analytica has already denied allegations of wrongdoing in other nations. The firm has been accused of setting up ‘honey traps’ and sub-contracting former spies to help swing elections, after Nix was caught on Channel 4’s cameras bigging up what his firm could offer beyond data crunching to a person posing as a Sri Lankan businessman.
After suspending Nix, the biz issued a statement to say instead that it “undertakes conversations with prospective clients to try to tease out any unethical or illegal intentions”.
AggregateIQ, GSR, Palantir… Any more firms to mention?
The web of organisations and people getting sucked into the scandal is growing rapidly, and MPs used the session to try and tease apart some of the who-knew-what-when, although Cambridge Analytica has tried to argue that Wylie doesn’t have the knowledge he claims.
“Christopher Wylie was a part-time contractor who left in July 2014 and has no direct knowledge of our work or practices since that date,” the biz said during its live-tweeted rebuttals to his evidence.
Nonetheless, Wylie offered up his view of how things had gone down, including that Canadian political ad firm AggregateIQ - who official Brexit campaign Vote Leave spent £3m (about 40 per cent of their campaign budget) on - could be linked to CA’s parent biz SCL.
Wylie claimed that he had introduced Jeff Silvester, co-founder of AIQ, to Nix, and that this resulted in AIQ being set up as what the whistleblower referred to as a Canadian franchise.
AIQ, he said, built the Ripon platform that CA then used for its data analytics work, citing as evidence recent reports that code uploaded to GitHub showed SCL had asked for the code to be transferred to AIQ.
AIQ has issued a statement saying it has “never been and is not a part of Cambridge Analytica or SCL”, has “never entered into a contract with Cambridge Analytica” (although it makes no mention, or denial, of a contract with SCL) and has “never knowingly been involved in any illegal activity.”
Wylie, though, said it is farcical to say AIQ didn’t have access to this data. He insisted that the biz must have had access to the data in question, arguing that this would have been a necessity if it was to develop the targeting software for SCL and CA.
“Cambridge Analytica would have the database, and AIQ would be able to access that, or the software doesn’t work,” he said.
Elsewhere in the session, Wylie claimed that Peter Thiel’s data analytics biz Palantir - whose largest client is the NSA - helped build the models they were working on at Cambridge Analytica.
Wylie said that the firms were introduced because Sophie Schmidt - daughter of Google’s Eric - worked with Nix and introduced him to Palantir; a claim Nix has previously refuted.
Sponsored: Balancing consumerization and corporate control
Page 2 of 2
The academic connection
The MPs also asked Wylie about the relationship between CA and Global Science Research, the firm set up by Cambridge academic Aleksander Kogan, who devised the This is Your Digital Life app that is alleged to have sucked in 50 million Facebook users’ details to develop psychological profiles to target ads against.
Wylie said that the relationship began as a very small pilot to ask if data was matchable to an electoral register, followed by a bigger one to make sure it could actually acquire the data in the speed that he said and then a much larger contract in June 2014.
He described this data as the foundational dataset that CA modeled its algorithms on, and claimed that the biz had signed a $1m contract to get its hands on it - claims CA denied.
Cambridge Analytica
@CamAnalytica
It was far from a $1M project. We paid $500K for the GSR data. Once Facebook told us it breached their terms, we deleted the data and we pursued GSR for damages.
17
5:34 AM - Mar 27, 2018
Twitter Ads info and privacy
35 people are talking about this
Cambridge Analytica
@CamAnalytica
It was far from a $1M project. We paid $500K for the GSR data. Once Facebook told us it breached their terms, we deleted the data and we pursued GSR for damages.
17
5:34 AM - Mar 27, 2018
Twitter Ads info and privacy
35 people are talking about this
The biz said that once Facebook had said that it had breached their terms it had deleted the data and was able to move on without the GSR data by commissioning new surveys and investing in commercial datasets. “Our algorithms and models bear no trace of it,” CA said.
Influencing Brexit
Wylie was also quizzed about the EU referendum, saying that he was absolutely convinced that there was a common plan between Vote Leave and the grassroots BeLeave and the Veterans for Britain groups, which Vote Leave allegedly funnelled money to AIQ through, along with the Democratic Union Party - which also used AIQ in the campaign.
“All of these companies somehow, for some reason, all decided to use AIQ,” he said, adding: "Why is it that all of a sudden, this company that has never worked on anything but Cambridge Analytica projects... somehow became the primary service provider to all of these supposedly independent campaign groups?"
Arguing that the concerted action was in breach of election law and was effectively cheating, he concluded: “It is completely reasonable to say that there could have been a different outcome in the referendum had there not been, in my view, cheating.”
He likened this to doping in the Olympics, saying that there is “not a debate about how much illegal drug you took… if you’re caught cheating you lose your medal”.
'I wasn't so devastated... I went on a vendetta'
Although Wylie was happy to opine on the importance of a true democratic process, he was comfortable when it came to his own involvement in the campaign, as MPs asked him about his approaches to Vote Leave campaign director Dominic Cummings.
Wylie - who said he is in favour of Brexit, but not at the expense of the "integrity of the democratic process" - admits to having approached Cummings to offer his services ahead of the referendum (after he had left CA), but told MPs his proposal was a pilot" and nothing more.
Cummings has issued a number of rebuttals to Wylie's claims in recent days, with one arising as the committee hearing went on, which described Wylie as a charlatan.
The committee said perhaps this was unfair, but asked whether Wylie had tried and failed to follow in Nix's footsteps in setting up a similar firm "hawking your wares" to Vote Leave, but didn't get the deal.
"Yes, but I wasn't so devastated... you have lots of meetings and it doesn’t [always] work out," said Wylie, appearing at his most flustered.
"Sorry, Dom, I wasn't so devastated that I couldn’t work with you that I've spent a year and a half on a vendetta to get back at you for a pilot project that didn't work out."
The MPs also pressed Wylie on when he deleted his copy of the data, which he said he did in 2015, and then confirmed this to Facebook in 2016.
Wylie also said that - although Facebook only changed its policy to stop apps being able to suck up info on users' friends in 2015 - he believed Facebook knew about the situation back in 2014, when he said Kogan “was delayed for a couple of days because Facebook had throttled the app so it couldn’t pull as much data”.
This is in line with Facebook’s developers’ blog, which shows the firm was aware of the privacy issues related to the Graph API loophole, but gave developers a year’s grace period before closing the tap
Wylie also claimed that Facebook didn’t want to make a big deal about the data that Kogan’s app had gathered when it was first made public in 2015 for fear of a PR backlash. He added that the most legal pushback he’d had was not from CA, but from Facebook.
“It’s Facebook that’s most upset about this story,” he said. “They sent some fairly intimidating legal correspondence. They haven’t taken action on that… They have gone silent, they won’t talk to me anymore.”
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/03/2 ... tleblower/