17 Mar Trust Incident Facebook
Case Author
iceberg.team & Deepseek-V3, Version 3, DeepSeek
Date Of Creation
14.02.2025
Incident Summary
The Facebook-Cambridge Analytica scandal involved the unauthorized harvesting of personal data from millions of Facebook users by Cambridge Analytica, a political consulting firm. This data was used to influence voter behavior during the 2016 US presidential election and other political campaigns, leading to widespread public outrage and regulatory scrutiny.
Ai Case Flag
AI
Name Of The Affected Entity
Brand Evaluation
5
Upload The Logo Of The Affected Entity
Industry
Technology & Social Media
Year Of Incident
2018
Upload An Image Illustrating The Case
Key Trigger
The key trigger was the revelation that Cambridge Analytica harvested data from 87 million Facebook users without their consent, using it for political advertising and voter manipulation.
Detailed Description Of What Happened
In 2014, Cambridge Analytica obtained data from Facebook users through a personality quiz app called ""This Is Your Digital Life."" The app collected not only the data of users who took the quiz but also data from their friends, leading to the unauthorized harvesting of millions of profiles. This data was used to create psychographic profiles and target political ads during the 2016 US presidential election. The scandal came to light in 2018, leading to investigations, lawsuits, and a significant loss of trust in Facebook.
Primary Trust Violation Type
Integrity-Based
Secondary Trust Violation Type
Competence-Based
Analytics Ai Failure Type
Privacy
Ai Risk Affected By The Incident
Privacy and Data Protection Risk, Ethical and Regulatory Compliance Risk, Economic Crime and Intellectual Property Risk, Geopolitical and State Misuse Risk
Capability Reputation Evaluation
4
Capability Reputation Rationales
Before the incident, Facebook was widely regarded as a highly capable and innovative company, dominating the social media landscape with a strong technical infrastructure and a history of successful product launches. Its ability to scale globally and maintain operational reliability was unquestioned, despite occasional criticisms of its data practices.
Character Reputation Evaluation
3
Character Reputation Rationales
Facebook character reputation was mixed before the incident. While it was seen as a pioneer in connecting people globally, it faced criticism for its handling of user data, lack of transparency, and ethical lapses. The company focus on growth often overshadowed concerns about privacy and ethical conduct.
Reputation Financial Damage
The scandal led to a significant drop in Facebook stock price, with billions of dollars wiped off its market value. Public trust in the platform declined, and the company faced multiple lawsuits, regulatory fines, and calls for stricter data privacy laws. The incident also damaged Facebook reputation as a responsible steward of user data.
Severity Of Incident
5
Company Immediate Action
Facebook initially downplayed the incident, but as public outrage grew, Mark Zuckerberg issued a public apology and testified before Congress. The company also announced changes to its data access policies and suspended Cambridge Analytica from its platform.
Response Effectiveness
The response was partially effective. While the apology and policy changes addressed some concerns, critics argued that Facebook actions were reactive rather than proactive. The company reputation remained tarnished, and trust in its platform continued to erode.
Model L1 Elements Affected By Incident
Reciprocity, Brand
Reciprocity Model L2 Cues
Transparency & Explainability, Accountability & Liability, Terms & Conditions (Legal Clarity), Error & Breach Handling
Brand Model L2 Cues
Brand Image & Reputation, Recognition & Market Reach, Brand Consistency & Cohesion, Brand Purpose & Mission
Social Adaptor Model L2 Cues
User Control & Agency, Privacy Management & Consent Mechanisms
Social Protector Model L2 Cues
Community Moderation & Governance, Reputation Systems & 3rd‐Party Endorsements
Response Strategy Chosen
Apology, Reparations & Corrective Action
Mitigation Strategy
Facebook response included a public apology from Mark Zuckerberg, testimony before Congress, and changes to its data access policies. The company also suspended Cambridge Analytica and conducted internal audits to prevent future breaches. However, critics argued that these measures were insufficient to restore trust fully.
Model L1 Elements Of Choice For Mitigation
Reciprocity, Brand
L2 Cues Used For Mitigation
Transparency & Explainability, Accountability & Liability, Terms & Conditions (Legal Clarity), Brand Purpose & Mission
Further References
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/17/us/politics/cambridge-analytica-trump-campaign.html, https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/mar/19/facebook-cambridge-analytica-user-data-latest-more-than-87m-affected, https://www.ft.com/content/6b2f11f6-2a1e-11e8-a34a-7e7563b0b0f4
Curated
1
The Trust Incident Database is a structured repository designed to document and analyze cases where data analytics or AI failures have led to trust breaches.
© 2025, Copyright Glinz & Company
No Comments