by Randolph J. May and Michael J. Horney
You have probably heard about the “Facebook
controversy.” Facebook allowed as many as 50 million Facebook profiles to be
shared with a London-based analytics company, Cambridge Analytica. According to
reports,
among other things, these Facebook profiles were used by President Donald
Trump’s presidential campaign to target advertisements to consumers during the
2016 election.
It is not clear at this point if Facebook or
Cambridge Analytica did anything illegal, but the Federal Trade Commission
(FTC) recently announced
that it has opened an investigation, as it should. And Facebook’s CEO Mark
Zuckerberg has published
full-page ads in over ten British and American newspapers apologizing for a “breach
of trust,” which at the very least, suggests the need for some remedial action by
Facebook.
Ensuring privacy online has been the subject of much
debate over the last several years, especially after the FCC’s October 2016
adoption of its Broadband Privacy Order,
which subsequently was overturned
by Congress in March 2017. The congressional action generated considerable
reaction on social media platforms, but one thing is very clear: Had the FCC’s Broadband Privacy Order remained in
effect, it would not have prevented Facebook’s actions which led to the current
controversy – or any future controversies regarding the handling of privacy
expectations by an edge provider.
In an April 1
New York Times op-ed, the Obama administration’s FCC Chairman
Tom Wheeler implies that the FCC’s October 2016 rules adopted under his
leadership would have prevented Facebook’s practices that created the current
controversy. (WARNING: Mr. Wheeler’s op-ed was published on April Fool’s Day!)
Aside from the fact that Facebook’s “breach of trust” began back in 2014 before
the FCC’s 2016 order was adopted, more importantly, the FCC’s rules only imposed
privacy restrictions on broadband Internet providers, not edge providers like
Facebook and Google.
So, if nothing else, the controversy surrounding
Facebook’s “breach of trust” should highlight why the FCC’s Broadband Privacy Order was so problematic.
Web giants like Facebook and Google collect and sell
huge amounts of consumer data. Indeed, that is the essence of their business
models. As discussed in a June 2016 Perspectives from FSF Scholars,
the reason consumers do not pay monthly subscription fees for Facebook and
Google is because they instead “pay” by giving up their personal information.
Nowadays, consumers frequently sign onto mobile applications using their
Facebook and Google accounts. When a consumer uses a social media login to
access a third-party application, he or she grants permission for all
activities on that application to be shared with the respective social media
platform. Among U.S. consumers, Facebook represents
over 79% of social logins and Google represents nearly 12% of social logins. The
use of web browsers and mobile operating systems allows these service providers
to access a massive amount of consumer information. Google Chrome currently
comprises nearly
60%
of the of the U.S. web browser market.
In contrast, Internet service providers cannot access
nearly the amount of consumer data that edge providers access and the range of
personal data they access is more restricted. A February 2016 study
by respected privacy scholar Peter Swire, along with colleagues Justin Hemmings
and Alana Kirkland, found that WiFi offloading and encryption substantially
limit ISPs’ access to consumer data. In fact, the paper determined that broadband
providers have access to less than 30% of subscribers’ data, significantly less
than the amount of data visible to edge providers.
The FCC’s October 2016 Broadband Privacy Order, to which Mr. Wheeler refers in his April
Fool’s Day op-ed, was misguided in that it imposed more stringent regulations on
broadband Internet service providers than those that applied to edge providers
like Google and Facebook under Federal Trade Commission precedents – even
though the edge providers certainly posed no less privacy threat than the ISPs.
Thus, the FCC’s Broadband Privacy Order
created a disparate privacy regulatory regime that clearly favored the web
giants.
When Congress overturned the Broadband Privacy Order in March 2017, the effect was to create a
symmetrical privacy regulatory regime applicable to both edge providers and
Internet service providers. This was an important step. Now, with the Facebook
controversy capturing the public’s attention – and with Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg
set to testify soon before Congress regarding what he has called a “breach of
trust” – perhaps Congress will decide to adopt new legislation delineating
safeguards to protect consumer data.
If Congress does legislate, there is a reasonable
debate to be had regarding the extent of the regulatory requirements and the
way they are implemented. But one principle ought to be unarguable: It doesn’t
make sense in today’s Internet ecosystem to treat Internet service providers
more stringently than the Facebooks and Googles of the world when it comes to
privacy regulation.