The effect of GDPR on the social networks and other large data-dependent services like ad-targeting and search has been even thrust even further into the limelight by the recent revelations about Cambridge Analytica and Facebook.
Until recently, I had assumed that GDPR would favour these large networks because their ability to facilitate sharing would mean that consent to receive content and adverts would be far easier for them than for businesses that need individual consent from users.
However, as Samir Addamine argues below, that may not be the case and certainly it feels like Facebook have got on the wrong side of public opinion, making it easier for politically-motivated prosecutors to take a big swing at them.
Some of the better posts I have read from experts in both communication and law:
Cambridge Analytica, Facebook and the Right to Freedom of Thought by Susie Alegre of Doughty Street Chambers
It’s undeniable that Facebook’s attitude toward the collection of user data has been cavalier at best, and invasive at worst. By arguing that users should have known what they were getting into because it was all there in the terms of service, One of the fundamental tenets of GDPR is to empower users to give their consent willingly, and with full knowledge of how their information will be used and for what purpose. To that end, the regulations prohibit companies from using “long illegible terms and conditions full of legalese,”