|
1 导读 Facebook泄露门（新京报） 2 音乐| 精读 | 翻译 | 词组  一大败笔 本文英文部分选自经济学人Leaders版块 What Zuckerberg should do 扎克伯格（Zuckerberg）应该怎么做？ Facebook faces a reputational meltdown 脸书（Facebook）面临信誉危机 This is how it, and the wider industry, should respond 整个行业应该如何应对 LAST year the idea took hold that Mark Zuckerberg might run for president in 2020 and seek to lead the world’s most powerful country. Today, Facebook’s founder is fighting to show that he is capable of leading the world’s eighth-biggest listed company or that any of its 2.1bn users should trust it. 去年许多人相信：马克·扎克伯格（Mark Zuckerberg）将参加2020年总统竞选，以领导世界上最强大的国家。如今，脸书（Facebook）创始人正努力证明，他有能力领导这家全球第八大上市公司，或者说，Facebook值得它的21亿用户信任。 News that Cambridge Analytica (CA), a firm linked to President Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign, got data on 50m Facebook users in dubious, possibly illegal, ways has lit a firestorm . Mr Zuckerberg took five days to reply and, when he did, he conceded that Facebook had let its users down in the past but seemed not to have grasped that its business faces a wider crisis of confidence. After months of talk about propaganda and fake news, politicians in Europe and, increasingly, America see Facebook as out of control and in denial. Congress wants him to testify. Expect a roasting. 报道称，剑桥分析公司（Cambridge Analytica (CA)）与2016年唐纳德·特朗普总统大选有种种牵连，并以疑似非法的途径获得了5000万Facebook用户的数据，该消息一传出，舆论哗然。扎克伯格用了五天的时间来回应，在回应中他承认Facebook过去让用户失望了，但他似乎没有意识到Facebook面临着更广泛的信用危机。在谈论了数月有关政治宣传与假新闻后，欧洲与越来越多的美国政治家们认为Facebook已经失控但却拒绝承认。国会希望他能为自己一证清白。一场“烤”问也已经近在咫尺了。 Since the news, spooked investors have wiped 9% off Facebook’s shares. Consumers are belatedly waking up to the dangers of handing over data to tech giants that are run like black boxes. Already, according to the Pew Research Centre, a think-tank, a majority of Americans say they distrust social-media firms. Mr Zuckerberg and his industry need to change, fast. 消息传出以来，投资者们惊慌失措，Facebook的市值也随之蒸发了9%。后知后觉的消费者们终于意识到，将数据交给科技巨头们存在被他们暗箱操作的的危险。智库皮尤研究中心（Pew Research Centr）称，大部分的美国人表示他们已经对社交媒体失去了信任。扎克伯格和他所在的行业急需改变，迫在眉睫。。 The addiction game 游戏上瘾 Facebook’s business relies on three elements: keeping users glued to their screens, collecting data about their behaviour and convincing advertisers to pay billions of dollars to reach them with targeted ads. The firm has an incentive to promote material that grabs attention and to sell ads to anyone. Its culture melds a ruthless pursuit of profit with a Panglossian and narcissistic belief in its own virtue. Mr Zuckerberg controls the firm’s voting rights. Clearly, he gets too little criticism. Facebook业务依赖于三个要素：维持用户黏着度，收集用户日常行为数据，并说服广告商投入数十亿美元的定向广告。该公司有十足的动力使信息夺人眼球，并把广告卖给每个用户。它的文化是融合对利润的无底线追求、过分乐观和自恋为一体。扎克伯格先生控制着公司的投票权。显然，他得到的批评太少了…… In the latest fiasco, it emerged that in 2013 an academic in Britain built a questionnaire app for Facebook users, which 270,000 people answered. They in turn had 50m Facebook friends. Data on all these people then ended up with CA. (Full disclosure: The Economist once used CA for a market-research project.) Facebook says that it could not happen again and that the academic and CA broke its rules; both deny doing anything wrong. Regulators in Europe and America are investigating. Facebook knew of the problem in 2015, but it did not alert individual users. Although nobody knows how much CA benefited Mr Trump’s campaign, the fuss has been amplified by the left’s disbelief that he could have won the election fairly. Facebook的最近一次危机发生在2013年，当时一位英国学者开发了面向Facebook用户的一款问卷应用，其中有27万用户参与了该调查。而这些用户共有约五千万Facebook好友。最终参与调查者和其好友的数据都到了剑桥分析公司手上（完全披露：《经济学人》曾经雇佣剑桥分析公司做过一项市场调查项目）。Facebook称，这种事情不会再发生，且指责那位学者和剑桥分析公司破坏了规矩；然而当事双方都不承认错误。欧美国家的监管部门正在调查此事。关于剑桥分析公司帮助特朗普竞选总统这件事，Facebook在2015年就知道，但它没有提醒个人用户。虽然没有人知道剑桥分析公司给特朗普的竞选带去多少好处，但左翼势力认为特朗普胜之不公，并将此事件的影响放大了。 But that does not give Facebook a defence. The episode fits an established pattern of sloppiness towards privacy, tolerance of inaccuracy and reluctance to admit mistakes. In early 2017 Mr Zuckerberg dismissed the idea that fake news had influenced the election as “pretty crazy”. In September Facebook said Kremlin-linked firms had spent a mere $100,000 to buy 3,000 adverts on its platform, failing at first to mention that 150m users had seen free posts by Russian operatives. It has also repeatedly misled advertisers about its user statistics. 然而这并不能给Facebook 的行为辩护。一系列的事件已成既定套路：对隐私的粗心大意，对错误的容忍以及承认错误的不情不愿。早在2017年的时候，扎克伯格（Zuckerberg）就反驳假新闻影响选举的说法“太疯狂”，并嗤之以鼻。9月份，Facebook透露，与俄国政府相关的公司仅花费了10万美元购买它平台上的3000条广告，但一开始并没有提到说1.5亿的用户已经看到了由俄国特工发布的免费帖子。它也反复地使用用户数据来误导广告商。 Facebook is not about to be banned or put out of business, but the chances of a regulatory backlash are growing. Europe is inflicting punishment by a thousand cuts, from digital taxes to antitrust cases. And distrustful users are switching off. The American customer base of Facebook’s core social network has stagnated since June 2017. Its share of America’s digital advertising market is forecast to dip this year for the first time. The network effect that made Facebook ever more attractive to new members as it grew could work in reverse if it starts to shrink. Facebook is worth $493bn, but only has $14bn of physical assets. Its value is intangible—and, potentially, ephemeral. 脸书（Facebook）还不会被禁，也不会倒闭，但是监管力度反弹的可能性正在加强。欧洲正通过数字税和反垄断法案对其进行了严厉处罚，而且不再信任它的用户们也正在弃用Facebook。2017年6月以来，Facebook核心社交网络的美国客户群体不再活跃。今年，它在美国数字广告市场的份额预计将第一次下降。网络效应使Facebook对新用户产生前所未有的吸引力，但当Facebook开始缩水时，这种效应可能会起反作用。Facebook市值4930亿美元，但它只有140亿美元的实体资产，它的价值是无形的，也是潜在的，短暂的。 If Mr Zuckerberg wants to do right by the public and his firm, he must rebuild trust. So far he has promised to audit some apps, restrict developers’ access to data still further, and help people control which apps have access to their data. 如果扎克伯格先生想做有益于公众和公司的事，他必须要重建信任。到目前为止，他已经承诺审查一些应用程序，进一步限制开发者访问数据，并帮助人们控制哪些应用程序可以访问他们的数据。 That doesn’t go nearly far enough. Facebook needs a full, independent examination of its approach to content, privacy and data, including its role in the 2016 election and the Brexit referendum. This should be made public. Each year Facebook should publish a report on its conduct that sets out everything from the prevalence of fake news to privacy breaches. 但这还远远不够。Facebook需要全面、独立的审查，包括针对用户发表的言论、隐私和数据保护的方法，以及其在2016年美国大选和英国脱欧公投中的所起的作用。这应该公之于众。每年，Facebook应该公布一份报告，陈述公司在各类事件中的行为表现，包括从假新闻流行到隐私侵犯等。 Next, Facebook and other tech firms need to open up to outsiders, safely and methodically. They should create an industry ombudsman—call it the Data Rights Board. Part of its job would be to set and enforce the rules by which accredited independent researchers look inside platforms without threatening users’ privacy. Software is being developed with this in mind . The likes of Facebook raise big questions. How does micro-targeting skew political campaigns? What biases infect facial-recognition algorithms? Better they be answered with evidence instead of outrage. 接下来，Facebook和其他科技公司，需要安全地、有条理地向外部开放。他们应该创建行业监察机构——我们可以称之为数据权利委员会。它的部分职责是制定和执行规则，确保只有经过认证的独立研究人员才可以使用平台数据，且不会对用户的隐私造成威胁。这样的软件正在研发中。Facebook的点赞功能引发质疑。微目标定位如何影响政治竞选的公正性？什么偏见会影响面部识别算法？希望Facebook带着证据而不是情绪来回答这些问题。 The board or something like it could also act as a referee for complaints, and police voluntary data-protection protocols. Facebook, for example, is planning to comply worldwide with some of the measures contained in a new European law, called the General Data Protection Regulation. Among other things, this will give users more power to opt out of being tracked online and to stop their information being shared with third parties. Adherence to such rules needs to be closely monitored. 委员会或者类似组织也可以成为处理这些投诉的仲裁方，监督自愿的数据保护条款。比如，Facebook计划在全球范围内执行《通用数据保护条例》中的一些措施，这是一项刚确立的欧洲新法。除此之外，这也将给予互联网用户更多权力，选择不被在线跟踪，以及防止他们的信息被第三方共享。上述条款的执行需要紧盯严控。 Thumbs down 否定 Tech has experience of acting collectively to solve problems. Standards on hardware and software, and the naming of internet domains, are agreed on jointly. Facebook’s rivals may be wary but, if the industry does not come up with a joint solution, a government clampdown will become inevitable. 科技行业往往可以协调合作，解决各种新问题。硬件和软件方面的标准、互联网域名的命名，都是人们共同商定的。Facebook的竞争者们可能会在处理用户个人数据时多加小心，但是如果互联网行业不商讨出一个联合解决方案，必将因此受到政府的压制。 Facebook seems to think it only needs to tweak its approach. In fact it, and other firms that hoover up consumer data, should assume that their entire business model is at risk. As users become better informed, the alchemy of taking their data without paying and manipulating them for profit may die. Firms may need to compensate people for their data or let them pay to use platforms ad-free. Profits won’t come as easily, but the alternative is stark. If Facebook ends up as a regulated utility with its returns on capital capped, its earnings may drop by 80%. How would you like that, Mr Zuckerberg? Facebook似乎认为它只需要稍微调整下方法即可。事实上，Facebook和其他拥有大量互联网用户个人数据的公司应当明白，整个行业都处于危险边缘。当互联网用户对事实更加了解，靠利用他们的免费个人数据发家致富这个好点子可就不顶用了。这些公司可能需要为人们的个人数据泄漏进行补偿，或者让人们付费使用无广告的平台。获利难，不获利更难。如果脸书最后成为一个受管制的公共事业单位，它的资本回报将会受限。其收益可能会下降80%。扎老板，您怎么看？ 翻译组： Cece，女，消防工作者，CATTI三笔 Wesley, 男，自由职业，经济学人爱好者 Doris，女，法律学习者，经济学人爱好者 Alieen，女，大四数学狗，经济学人爱好者 Xiaofeng, 女，好奇心重的医疗民工，经济学人爱好者 校核组： Samantha，女，外企低管，邓伦未婚妻 Eva , 女，经贸翻译学生，经济学人爱好者 3 观点 |评论|思考 本次观点由Neil独家奉献 Neil，男，外贸民工，经济学人镀锌粉 最开始知道Facebook数据泄露新闻时，没啥特别的感觉，因为在国内似乎已经很习惯个人信息被泄露，每天都能接到骚扰电话。但事实上，本次泄露事件是自Facebook成立以来面临最大的危机，事态的发展几乎可以决定Facebook的未来。 为什么这次事件特别严重？这和当下人们对数据安全和隐私保护意识加强有很大关系，数据泄露对Facebook公众形象造成了巨大损害，就像当年艳照门让公众对各路明星的清纯形象大跌眼镜，也断送了女明星们本有的美好前程。如今想要恢复公众对Facebook在隐私保护和数据保护上的信任，需要付出更为巨大的努力。 美国政府一直以来想对科技巨头进行监管，但科技巨头常以数据安全和隐私保护为由拒绝公开用户信息，这次泄露事件可以给美国政府极好的监管理由。扎克伯格也表示不反对Facebook受到监管。 虽然本人对小扎同学无比钦佩，但不管怎样，数据外泄，企业都能逃其责。咱们都希望生活在一个安全的世界里，希望变成了失望，也只能祝愿小扎同学能带领公司重新获得公众的信任吧。 各位大佬摘要 Cece：面对人们的投诉，最终欧盟委员会或者其他组织可能介入解决，脸书也计划执行欧盟相关的数据保护法律条款。但是前景并不乐观，脸书并没有意识到此次信息泄漏的严重性，整个行业也没有找到一个可行的解决办法。 Wesley：在飞速发展的互联网时代，商场上的厮杀瞬息万变，身处险境，而不知敌人是谁，越是大公司就越容易垮掉。在过往倒掉的大公司中，有的被八竿子打不着的其他行业的公司降维打击，有的则是因为自身问题而关门大吉。Facebook是全球市值最高的十家互联网科技公司之一，一直是资本宠儿，万民仰慕，姿态永远是信心满满，高歌向前。然而此次遭遇的信任危机则有可能是其发展过程的滑铁卢。处理地好，即便能安然度险，其暴露的种种问题也不可能使其风光依旧；处理地不好，则有可能在墙倒众人推的世人心态中轰然倒地。Facebook已经到了最危险的时候，小扎这么年轻，有足够的智慧和定力完美解决本次危机吗？让我们拭目以待。 Aileen：20世纪80年代以来，艾英戈和金德将电视广告的铺垫效果定义为:“通过唤起对某些问题的注意，并忽略别外一些问题，影响受众对政府、总统、政治和公职候选人进行评价的标准.” 现在这些铺垫效果可能出现在了社交媒体上：依靠精确定位客户群而让广告爸爸掏钱的Facebook将数据泄露给剑桥分析（CA），而该公司被怀疑操纵大众媒而更改人们的总统投票。由此人们惶恐不已，数据泄露的威胁终于使大众意识到了问题严重性并开始了数据保卫反击战。那作为第一个被开刀的“鸡”，小扎和这些产业又该如何应对才能挽回那些失去的信任呢？ Doris：“脸书劫数”是现在脸书所面临的最大的信任危机，现在不仅是被质疑影响美国特朗普的竞选还出现了被质疑影响其他多国的竞选以及英国脱欧公投丑闻。现在社交媒体上还出现了“删除脸书”，其中就有特斯拉和SpaceX创始人马斯克，表示删除了两家公司的主页。巴西为保证今年十月大选的顺利进行也开始对与剑桥分析公司（CA）有合作的公司进行调查。这也让个人用户产生惶恐，大数据的泄露不仅让人们面临“大数据杀熟”，更是让人们对自己的个人隐私产生不安全感，连脸书这种大公司都无法保证数据安全，那还有什么值得信任的呢? Samantha： 总觉得扎老板不太会公关，或是不屑于公关。发布道歉声明后，在社交平台上遭到了一些批评，认为他的道歉并没有诚意。也有很多西方媒体认为，数据泄露的错误之根本不在“剑桥分析”，而在于脸书，在于脸书的数据挖掘。这就让人不是很懂，没有数据挖掘做支撑，世界上的这些网站仅仅靠广告费能活下去吗？总之这次危机也好劫数也罢，终归会过去，脸书的用户基础太强大，全世界国家的覆盖率也接近百分百，就算这次没挺过去，也会有头书，眼书，鼻子书涌现出来让大家换个平台社交。至于扎老板，也许就像白居易说的那样，商人重利轻别离，前月浮梁买茶去。 4 愿景 小组 小编理工男，建筑底层民工，经济学人铁粉，和小伙伴(经济学人小群不超过8个人）看经济学人到现在已经将近500多天。现有一经济学人大群,如果您也有兴趣，可加入我们学习小组，群规甚严，请三思后而入群，WeChat : foxwulihua |
|
|
