The social-media giant faces a reputational crisis.
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.
去年有一個(gè)說法在到處流傳：臉書的CEO扎克伯格可能會(huì)參加2020年的總統(tǒng)競(jìng)選并且要帶領(lǐng)出世界上最強(qiáng)的國(guó)家半醉。如今，臉書的創(chuàng)始人們卻在盡力證明他有這個(gè)能力帶領(lǐng)世界前八大的公司并且他的2.1千萬用戶應(yīng)該相信他劝术。
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 (see United States section). 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.
據(jù)說一個(gè)與特朗普總統(tǒng)2016競(jìng)選有關(guān)聯(lián)的公司Cambridge Analytica (CA)從臉書那里以可疑的缩多、甚至可能是違法的方式獲取了5千萬用戶的數(shù)據(jù)信息，這點(diǎn)燃了美國(guó)人民的熊熊怒火养晋。扎克伯格用了5天的時(shí)間來回復(fù)這件事情衬吆，他認(rèn)為臉書曾讓用戶們失望，但他并沒有意識(shí)到其業(yè)務(wù)面臨著更恐怖的信任危機(jī)绳泉。在討論了好幾個(gè)月宣傳和假新聞后逊抡，歐洲的政客們以及越來越多的美國(guó)人開始認(rèn)為臉書處于失控狀態(tài)，卻拒絕承認(rèn)這個(gè)事實(shí)零酪。國(guó)會(huì)希望他能作證冒嫡，也許會(huì)產(chǎn)生進(jìn)一步的拷問。
Since the news, spooked investors have wiped 9% off Face- book’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.
自從這個(gè)新聞出現(xiàn)后四苇，驚恐的投資者們已經(jīng)撤資了9%孝凌。消費(fèi)者們也才意識(shí)到把數(shù)據(jù)交給科技巨頭們并且讓他們像黑盒子一樣玩耍的危險(xiǎn)性。根據(jù)一個(gè)智囊團(tuán)——Pew研究中心月腋，大部分美國(guó)人說他們不相信社交媒體公司胎许。扎克伯格和他的商業(yè)需要立即做出改變。
The addiction game
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 ?rm has an incentive to promote material that grabs attention and to sell ads to anyone. Its culture melds a ruthless pursuit of pro?t with a Panglossian and narcissistic belief in its own virtue. Mr Zuckerberg controls the ?rm’s voting rights. Clearly, he gets too little criticism.
臉書依賴于三個(gè)要素：使用戶依賴于他們的屏幕罗售；收集他們行為的相關(guān)數(shù)據(jù)辜窑；說服廣告商花上十億美金給用戶提供針對(duì)性的廣告。這個(gè)公司能提升你的材料讓你更能吸引用戶并且把廣告賣給任何人寨躁。它的文化融合了以龐德羅斯的方式對(duì)利益魯莽的追求和對(duì)自身道德的自戀傾向穆碎。扎克伯格決定這公司的投票權(quán)。很顯然职恳，他受到的批評(píng)太少了所禀。
In the latest ?asco, 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 bene?ted Mr Trump’s campaign, the fuss has been ampli?ed by the left’s disbelief that he could have won the election fairly.
在最新的財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告中，它發(fā)現(xiàn)在2013年放钦，英國(guó)的一位學(xué)者為Facebook用戶構(gòu)建了一個(gè)問卷調(diào)查應(yīng)用程序色徘，其中27萬人回答了問題。他們因此有了5千萬Facebook好友操禀。這些人的數(shù)據(jù)最終流到了CA的手里褂策。Facebook說這種事情不會(huì)再發(fā)生了，而且這個(gè)學(xué)者和CA破壞了規(guī)則；但他們兩個(gè)都拒絕承認(rèn)錯(cuò)誤斤寂。歐洲和美國(guó)的管理者正在調(diào)查這件事耿焊。雖然沒有知道特朗普的競(jìng)選從CA那里得到了多少好處，但是左派對(duì)于特朗普能公平贏得競(jìng)選這件事感到大吃一驚遍搞。
But that does not give Facebook a defence. The episode ?ts 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 in?uenced the election as“pretty crazy”. In September Facebook said Kremlin-linked ?rms had spent a mere $100,000 to buy 3,000 adverts on its platform, failing at ?rst to mention that 150m users had seen free posts by Russian operatives. It has also repeatedly misled advertisers about its user statistics.
但是這并不能帶給Facebook一些緩和罗侯。這一事件已經(jīng)是一個(gè)關(guān)于隱私傾向，容忍不準(zhǔn)確和不愿承認(rèn)錯(cuò)誤的問題溪猿。在2017年初钩杰，扎克伯格否決了假新聞“瘋狂地”影響了競(jìng)選這個(gè)看法。在12月诊县，F(xiàn)acebook說與克里姆林宮相關(guān)的公司只花了100,000美元在他的平臺(tái)上賣廣告讲弄，沒有解釋清楚15千萬用戶看見的俄羅斯操作員發(fā)的免費(fèi)動(dòng)態(tài)。他同樣總是誤導(dǎo)一些廣告商對(duì)于他的用戶數(shù)據(jù)的分析翎冲。
Facebook is not about to be banned or put out of business, but the chances of regulatory backlash are growing. Europe is in?icting punishment by a thousand cuts, from digital taxes to antitrust cases. And distrustful users are switching o?. 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 ?rst time. The network e?ect 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.
Facebook不是要被禁止或者逐出市場(chǎng)垂睬，相反媳荒，這是個(gè)機(jī)會(huì)去增強(qiáng)監(jiān)管反彈抗悍。從數(shù)據(jù)稅收到反托拉斯案件，歐洲正受到上千的削減懲罰钳枕。不信任軟件的用戶正在退出缴渊。從2017年6月開始珍逸，美國(guó)人作為Facebook的核心社交用戶正在逐漸減少模狭。它在美國(guó)數(shù)字廣告市場(chǎng)的份額預(yù)計(jì)今年將首次下滑。Facebook的網(wǎng)絡(luò)影響使他對(duì)于新用戶來說變得更加有吸引力卿啡，但如果這個(gè)影響開始縮減指蚁，也可以產(chǎn)生相反的效應(yīng)凝化。Facebook價(jià)值4930億美元酬荞，但是只有140億的實(shí)物資產(chǎn)。它的價(jià)值是無形的——甚至可能是短暫的枪向。
If Mr Zuckerberg wants to do right by the public and his ?rm, 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.
如果扎克伯格想要為人民和他的公司做一些正確的事情秘蛔，他必須重新建立起信任数苫。目前為止他只是承諾了要去重新審核一些軟件虐急，并且?guī)椭藗冞x擇什么軟件可以訪問他們的數(shù)據(jù)止吁，禁止開發(fā)者訪問數(shù)據(jù)這件事仍然很遙遠(yuǎn)。
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.
這是遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)不夠的俄删。Facebook需要一個(gè)完整的畴椰、獨(dú)立的檢查方式去檢查他的背景、隱私和數(shù)據(jù)帚戳，包括在2016年競(jìng)選中以及英國(guó)脫歐公投中他扮演的角色片任。這件事情應(yīng)該被公開对供。每一年Facebook都應(yīng)該發(fā)布一份關(guān)于其行為的報(bào)告，其中要列出從虛假新聞盛行到隱私泄露等一切事情涝动。
Next, Facebook and other tech ?rms 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 (see Science section). 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.
然后，F(xiàn)acebook和其他的科技公司需要安全的厦凤、有條不紊的公開給外人們较鼓。他們應(yīng)該創(chuàng)建一個(gè)行業(yè)監(jiān)察專員——稱之為數(shù)據(jù)權(quán)利委員會(huì)。他的一部分職責(zé)就是在沒有威脅到用戶隱私的情況下禽篱，強(qiáng)制規(guī)定已授權(quán)的獨(dú)立的研究院可以得到數(shù)據(jù)。軟件就是在以這樣的方式發(fā)展悼吱。對(duì)于Facebook的喜愛引發(fā)了更大的問題鲤脏。數(shù)據(jù)定位（利用用戶數(shù)據(jù)去分析他們的興趣并影響他們的決策）如何影響到政治運(yùn)動(dòng)的窥突？什么偏見會(huì)影響到面部識(shí)別算法？希望他們能用事實(shí)來解決這些問題而不是民憤称近。
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.
董事會(huì)或類似的組織也可以作為投訴和警方資源實(shí)施的數(shù)據(jù)保護(hù)協(xié)議的審查者忆畅。比如，F(xiàn)acebook正計(jì)劃在全球范圍內(nèi)遵循一項(xiàng)名為《通用數(shù)據(jù)保護(hù)條例》（General Data Protection Regulation）的歐洲新法律所包含的一些措施如失。此外，這可以給用戶更多權(quán)力去選擇不被他們網(wǎng)上跟蹤送粱，并且組織他們與第三方分享他們的信息抗俄。對(duì)這些法規(guī)的遵循情況需要密切監(jiān)測(cè)竭鞍。
Thumbs down
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.
科技有過一起解決問題的歷史晒夹。對(duì)于硬件和軟件的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)翔横，還有對(duì)于互聯(lián)網(wǎng)域名的命名荡短，都是大家一致同意的丐枉。Facebook的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手可能會(huì)比較謹(jǐn)慎，但如果他們自己想不出來一個(gè)解決辦法掘托，政府就一定會(huì)進(jìn)行打壓弯院。
Facebook seems to think it only needs to tweak its approach. In fact it, and other ?rms 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 pro?t may die. Firms may need to compensate people for their data or let them pay to use platforms ad-free. Pro?ts 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貌似認(rèn)為他們只需要換一個(gè)方法。但事實(shí)上泪掀，他和其他擁有大量消費(fèi)者數(shù)據(jù)的公司應(yīng)該意識(shí)到自己的整個(gè)商業(yè)模式都處于十分危險(xiǎn)的狀態(tài)听绳。隨著用戶知道的信息越來越多，這個(gè)免費(fèi)拿走他們的數(shù)據(jù)并用來掙錢的“煉金術(shù)”可能就失靈了族淮。公司可能需要因?yàn)檫@些數(shù)據(jù)而補(bǔ)償用戶辫红，或者讓他們交錢來使用沒有廣告的平臺(tái)凭涂。利益不會(huì)來的這么輕松，但是另一個(gè)選擇卻是嚴(yán)峻的贴妻。如果Facebook最終成為受監(jiān)管的公用事業(yè)公司切油，其資本回報(bào)率上限，其收益可能會(huì)下降80％名惩。你會(huì)喜歡這樣嗎澎胡，扎克伯格先生？
原文鏈接：https://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21739151-how-it-and-wider-industry-should-respond-facebook-faces-reputational-meltdown
個(gè)人興趣翻譯娩鹉，歡迎各位交流
