First: is this memoir better than Edward Snowden's? Yes. They're different and should be treated as such, but, yes, this one is a better book.
This book is better because of its style and how human it is, to me. While Snowden's report on what not only the US government did to its citizens and the rest of the world, together with some of the biggest tech companies on our planet, Wylie's ingeniously written, sly, funny, and extremely dark book touches several very human nerves, including what I believe is the most important one: what have I done and what can I do to better myself and try to end what I've been part of?
I'm very interested in what surveillance capitalism—a superb term coined by Shoshana Zuboff—does to people and the people who govern them, not to mention the current top-earning tech companies that believe they're more powerful than people.
Wylie's book starts off in pomp:
It’s June 2018, and I’m in Washington to testify to the U.S. Congress about Cambridge Analytica, a military contractor and psychological warfare firm where I used to work, and a complex web involving Facebook, Russia, WikiLeaks, the Trump campaign, and the Brexit referendum. As the former director of research, I’ve brought with me evidence of how Facebook’s data was weaponized by the firm, and how the systems they built left millions of Americans vulnerable to the propaganda operations of hostile foreign states. Schiff leads the questioning. A former federal prosecutor, he is sharp and precise with his lines of inquiry, and he wastes no time getting to the heart of the matter.
Did you work with Steve Bannon?
Yes.
Did Cambridge Analytica have any contacts with potential Russian agents?
Yes.
Do you believe that this data was used to sway the American electorate to elect the president of the United States?
Yes.
After that, there's a short admittance:
As one of the creators of Cambridge Analytica, I share responsibility for what happened, and I know that I have a profound obligation to right the wrongs of my past. Like so many people in technology, I stupidly fell for the hubristic allure of Facebook’s call to “move fast and break things.” I’ve never regretted something so much. I moved fast, I built things of immense power, and I never fully appreciated what I was breaking until it was too late.
After that, this book becomes interesting.
Earlier this year, Netflix released The Great Hack, a documentary that focused on Cambridge Analytica/SCL via another former acolyte, Brittany Kaiser. This book delves far deeper than fifty documentaries of that ilk would.
Wylie starts of with running off why he's interested in numbers, and what they actually mean now.
Tanks and bunker busters are useless against viral propaganda and Web-fueled radicalization. ISIS doesn’t just launch missiles; it also launches narratives. Russia compensates for its aging military equipment with “hybrid approaches” of attack, beginning with the ideological manipulation of target populations.
If you’re building a non-kinetic weapon designed for scaled perspecticide—the active deconstruction and manipulation of popular perception—you first have to understand on a deep level what motivates people.
Understanding people by analysing them, converting them to do what you want by understanding them, got it.
Before attempting to subjugate continents to the will of their clients, SCL—the company where Wylie worked under a man named Alexander Nix—wanted to try psychological warfare on a small scale, so they chose Trinidad and Tobago. And went further than possibly any company or government has gone before they did.
Getting the required data to build Jucikas’s envisioned targeting system would not be easy, but it was possible, due to a fluke of history in some parts of the developing world. Although there was substantial underdevelopment of traditional telecommunications infrastructure, largely stemming from corruption and the neglectful legacies of colonial administrations, some of the world’s poorest countries had leapfrogged generations of technology, achieving impressive advances in mobile networks.
In Kenya, for example, local laws and customs made it difficult for some people to get a bank account, leading to a system in which Kenyans used cash to buy mobile phone credits, which could then be traded as a kind of digital currency. In fact, we found that people in many poorer nations distrusted banks, having lived through economic crises, hyperinflation, and bank collapses, and used the same mobile workaround. This setup meant that everybody needed a phone, and that it needed to work well, so that in otherwise impoverished nations, there’d been rapid investment in relatively decent mobile infrastructure.
One unintended consequence of having large pluralities of citizens connected via mobile phone networks was that everybody could be traced, tracked, profiled, and communicated with. Jihadist networks such as ISIS, AQAP, and Boko Haram had already figured this out, taking advantage of easy access to the minds of future conquests. And that turned the rules of warfare upside down.
Next we needed a case study—a location where we could scale to a nation-state level, to show potential military clients what we were capable of doing. Trinidad and Tobago, with 1.3 million people, fit the bill perfectly. It was an island nation, self-contained yet with a variety of cultures. There was an Afro-Caribbean population, an Indo-Caribbean population, and a smattering of white people, creating an interesting cultural tension to explore. It was an ideal laboratory in which to run our experiments at scale.
To see what people were doing at home, by simply tapping into their use of the Internet, meant nothing to people who worked at SCL; at the very least, they got over their doubts fairly quickly:
Working with a set of contractors, SCL was able to tap into the telecom firehose, pick an IP address, and then sit and watch what a person in Trinidad was browsing on the Internet at that very moment. Not surprisingly, it was a lot of porn. People were browsing everything imaginable, including the culturally specific “Trini Porn.” I can remember sitting around the computer one evening and watching as someone toggled between looking up plantain recipes and watching porn, all while Nix laughed at them. It was a revoltingly giddy laugh, almost infantile. He looked up the IP address and then opened up Google Maps satellite view to see the neighborhood this person lived in.
Speaking of colonialism via white men:
He had inherited tens of millions of pounds and never needed to work. He could have dedicated his life to noble pursuits or simply settled into a life of leisure, sponging off his trust fund. But instead he chose SCL. Nix couldn’t help himself—he was intoxicated by power. Born too late to play colonial master in the old British Empire, he treated SCL as the modern equivalent. As Nix put it in one of our meetings, he got to “play the white man.” “They [are] just niggers,” he once said to a colleague in an email, referring to black politicians in Barbados.
Wylie writes a bit on Steve Bannon, a man who played a major part in Trump's campaign and id:
In 2005, the right-wing commentator Andrew Breitbart began Breitbart.com, an online news aggregator, and by 2007 it had grown to publish original content as Breitbart News. The site ran on the undercurrent of Breitbart’s personal philosophy, which has been referred to as the Breitbart Doctrine: Politics flows from culture, and if conservatives wanted to successfully dam up progressive ideas in America, they would have to first challenge the culture. And so Breitbart was founded to be not only a media platform but also a tool for reversing the flow of American culture.
When Andrew Breitbart (who had introduced the Mercers to Bannon) died suddenly in 2012, Bannon took his place as senior editor, and assumed his philosophy. At our first meeting, he was the executive chair of Breitbart and had come to Cambridge in search of promising young conservatives and candidates to staff his new London bureau. The logic, as we later learned with Brexit, was that Britain served as an important cultural signifier for Americans. Win the Brits, and so falls America, Bannon later told me, as the mythologies and tropes of Hollywood had crafted an image of Britain as a country of educated, rational, and classy people.
He had a problem, though. For all the site’s sound and fury, it became pigeonholed as a place for young, straight white guys who couldn’t get laid.
Gamergate was one of the first, most public instances of their culture war: When several women tried to bring to light the gross misogyny within the gaming industry, they were hounded, doxed, and sent numerous death threats in a massive campaign against the “progressives” imposing their “feminist ideology” onto gaming culture. Gamergate was not instigated by Breitbart, but it was a sign to Bannon, who saw that angry, lonely white men could become incredibly mobilized when they felt that their way of life was threatened. Bannon realized the power of cultivating the misogyny of horny virgins.
Their nihilistic anger and talks of “beta uprisings” simmered in the recesses of the Internet. But growing an army of “incels” (involuntary celibates) would not be sufficient for the movement he fantasized about. He needed to find a new approach.
Analytical views into how FOX, the Rupert Murdoch-owned media-campaign circus, works, is also interesting, but part of the run-of-the-mill everyday work that SCL did for their customers. And who were they?
CA’s client list eventually grew into a who’s who of the American right wing. The Trump and Cruz campaigns paid more than $5 million apiece to the firm. The U.S. Senate campaigns of Roy Blunt of Missouri and Tom Cotton of Arkansas became clients. And, of course, there was the losing House bid of Art Robinson, the Oregon Republican who collected piss and church organs. In the autumn of 2014, Jeb Bush paid a visit to the office. Despite having received millions from Mercer, Nix never bothered to learn much about U.S. politics, so he asked Gettleson to join him. Bush, who had come alone, began by telling Nix that if he decided to run for president, he wanted to be able to do it on his terms, without having to “court the crazies” in his party.
What ties Wylie together with Snowden the most interestingly—apart from their vivisections—are their morals. They've both come to places where they've fervently exposed their own ways of thinking and come to the conclusion that something must stop:
In our invasion of America, we were purposefully activating the worst in people, from paranoia to racism. I immediately wondered if this was what Stanley Milgram felt like watching his research subjects. We were doing it in service to men whose values were in total opposition to mine. Bannon and Mercer were more than happy to hire the very people they sought to oppress—queers, immigrants, women, Jews, Muslims, and people of color—so that they could weaponize our insights and experiences to advance these causes. I was no longer working at a firm that fought against radical extremists who shackled women, brutalized nonbelievers, and tortured gays; I was now working for extremists who wanted to build their very own dystopia in America and Europe. Nix knew this and didn’t even care. For the cheap thrill of sealing another deal, he had begun entertaining bigots and homophobes, expecting his staff not only to look the other way, but for us to betray our own people.
In the end, we were creating a machine to contaminate America with hate and cultish paranoia, and I could no longer ignore the immorality and illegality of it all. I did not want to be a collaborator. Then, in August 2014, something terrible happened. A veteran SCL staffer, a longtime friend and confidant of Nix’s, returned from Africa severely ill with malaria. He came into the office red-eyed and sweating profusely, slurring his words and talking nonsense. After Nix shouted at him for being late, the rest of us urged him to go to the hospital. But before he could be seen at the hospital, he collapsed and tumbled down a flight of stairs, smashing his head hard on the concrete. He slipped into a coma. His brain swelled and part of his skull was removed. His doctors worried that his cognitive functioning might never be the same. After Nix returned from visiting the hospital, he asked HR for guidance on liability insurance and how long he had to keep paying his loyal friend, still in a coma and missing part of his skull. This seemed callous in the extreme. It was in that moment that I realized Nix was a monster. Worse, I knew he wasn’t alone. Bannon was also a monster. And soon enough, were I to stay, I worried that I would become a monster, too.
Wylie goes into much detail and eloquently ties ribbons together to explain how not only Trump's people, but other major players—for example, the organisations behind the entire pro-Brexit organisation, Russian organisations, political interests, and companies looking to have Trump voted and Facebook—worked feverishly to goals that would further the few without a care in the world about what they were doing, which was basically PSYOP.
In calls with the Trump Organization, we heard about declining ratings for The Apprentice and how fewer people were staying at Trump hotels and gambling in the casinos. With the advent of online gambling and the total dependence on Donald Trump’s public image as a sexy, savvy billionaire, it seemed his team was beginning to realize that an outdated casino system and an aging, orange-stained C-list celebrity didn’t conjure “sexy and fun” for potential new customers. The Trump brand was on a downturn, and the company needed to figure out how to give it a boost.
Wylie gives The Guardian's editors a boot for having cut out "how Sophie Schmidt—daughter of Google CEO Eric Schmidt—had introduced Nix to Palantir, setting off the chain of events that led to SCL’s foray into data warfare." More on that:
In fact, I had emails about Sophie Schmidt’s involvement in SCL. The story wasn’t remotely libelous, but Schmidt threw a battalion of lawyers at The Guardian, with the threat of a time-consuming and expansive legal battle. Instead of fighting an obviously spurious lawsuit, the paper agreed to remove Schmidt’s name several weeks after publication. Then Cambridge Analytica threatened to sue over the same article. And even though The Guardian had documents, emails, and files that confirmed everything I had told them, they backed down again. Editors agreed to flag certain paragraphs as “disputed,” to appease Cambridge Analytica and mitigate the paper’s liability. They took Cadwalladr’s well-sourced story and watered it down.
Far more interesting are a lot of the recordings from SCL/CA meetings that were unearthed:
I sat in Alistair’s office as Briant played a recording of Nigel Oakes, the CEO of SCL Group, Cambridge Analytica’s parent company. “Hitler attacked the Jews, because he didn’t have a problem with the Jews at all, but the people didn’t like the Jews,” said Oakes. “So he just leveraged an artificial enemy. Well, that’s exactly what Trump did. He leveraged a Muslim.”
Oakes’s company was helping Trump do what Hitler did, but he seemed to find the whole thing amusing.
In a separate clip of a discussion between Briant and Wigmore, the Leave.EU communications director also seemed to be interested in reviewing the strategic nature of the Nazis’ communication campaigns. In the tape, Wigmore is recorded explaining, “The propaganda machine of the Nazis, for instance—if you take away all the hideous horror and that kind of stuff, it was very clever, the way they managed to do what they did. In its pure marketing sense, you can see the logic of what they were saying, why they were saying it, and how they presented things, and the imagery….And looking at that now, in hindsight, having been on the sharp end of this [2016 EU referendum] campaign, you think, crikey, this is not new, and it’s just—it’s using the tools that you have at the time.”
There is far more to this book than I first thought. Wylie is clearly intelligent and seemingly straightforward, which makes this book interesting, not because SCL/Cambridge Analytica are evil companies, but a syndrome of something far worse; the fact that Facebook, the governments of USA, England, and Russia get slammed in this book are proof of this, all splayed out in the book. Kudos to Profile/Serpent's Tail for having edited this out. It's a fierce story and should get more press attention.
Posted from my blog with SteemPress : https://niklasblog.com/?p=23704
Hi pivic,
Visit curiesteem.com or join the Curie Discord community to learn more.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Congratulations @pivic! You have completed the following achievement on the Steem blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
You can view your badges on your Steem Board and compare to others on the Steem Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOP
To support your work, I also upvoted your post!
Vote for @Steemitboard as a witness to get one more award and increased upvotes!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Hello Hello!
Well, until I see the book very interesting, it gives me that feeling that I have to read out of curiosity hahaha
Greetings from Venezuela!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
ehy dear @pivic, I really liked your piece, you made a very clear and detailed description of the contents of the book. I can perceive your interest and your concern about how things are going in the world, and the fact that there are few powerful puppeteers capable of keeping the strings of millions of citizens. on the one hand there is a lot of ignorance, on the other a lot of discomfort: the simple citizen cannot do anything and the politics of the strong is corrupt, it is dirty, it is used only for the good of the few and to maintain the status quo of the differences. remains what you consider particularly important: "What have I done and what can I do to improve myself and try to put an end to what I belonged to?" do you have an answer? What can we do? I honestly don't know.
Thanks for sharing with us and congratulations on your curie rating
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
First: congratulations to you for this great publication. I think you were objective, keen and sincere.
Maybe I do not agree with your opinion because I have lived in my own flesh the famous "psychological warfare" or last generation marketing. I am Venezuelan and I live in Venezuela. Here they tell you through the media that "you are fine, it doesn't matter if you haven't eaten"; "You are well hungry, working every day without the money reaching you because you agree with the political system."
From your observations, I read that the book does not justify Nazi propaganda. But that "removing the horror" was a very smart strategy. I do not know what to say...
For me nothing is justified if the goal is submission by whim. Nothing is justified if the goal is even the death of the "other" to achieve the ultimate goal. BUT I RECOGNIZE that this way of thinking is part of the history of mankind.
Great review of the book @pivic. A cordial greeting
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Hi! I know that Venezuela is deeply affected by both propaganda from its government and also from the outside, perhaps mainly the USA.
To me, I believe Wylie deeply regrets what he's done; he both admits to having affected the American voting system, Brexit in the UK, how government voting in countries like Trinidad and Tobago have occurred, and also of how Facebook has distorted the views of many users. It's all highly interesting, and it goes on.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit