Liberal Democrats using personal data to profile every voter in UK

I remember when this party had morals, you know like respect democratic principles, not make promises they were unable to keep and worst of all, respect peoples privacy.... Those days are clearly gone.

https://news.sky.com/story/the-lib-d...score-11828202

The Liberal Democrats are profiling every voter in the country by rating their political preferences, Sky News can reveal.

This includes which party they will vote for in the next election and whether they are a Remainer or Leaver.

The percentage ratings - there are at least 42 in total, although the identity of only 37 are known - estimate whether someone voted Leave or Remain in the 2016 EU referendum and predict how they would vote if there was a second poll in 2019.

Other scored characteristics include "Likelihood of being a Labour voter in 2019", "Likelihood of being a core Lib Dem" and "Net difference in likelihood of voting for the Conservative or Brexit Party in 2019".

Matthew Rice, Scotland director of digital campaign organisation Open Rights Group, was assigned nine scores by the Liberal Democrats. In a possible 2019 election, it gave him a 15% chance of voting Liberal Democrat, a 22% chance of voting Brexit Party and a 20% chance of voting Conservative.

In a second EU referendum, Mr Rice was deemed 77% likely to vote Remain.

"The scores don't necessarily represent my values, but for all intents and purposes, for the Liberal Democrats, this is me," he told Sky News.

"They've decided where I sit on a political spectrum and in a general election they will define me based on these scores. That does feel quite intrusive. It doesn't feel reflective of what you would want from a democratic culture."

Data protection law prohibits processing of "special categories of personal data", including data on political affiliation, but grants political parties an exemption as long as there is "substantial public interest".

However, data protection experts warned that the Liberal Democrats' automated profiling fell into a legal grey area and could be challenged by the data watchdog, which is currently investigating political parties' use of data.

[Hom3r]

Apparently she has £3.4m (could be €s) recieved from the EU which wasn't declared.

Originally Posted by Hom3r

Apparently she has £3.4m (could be €s) recieved from the EU which wasn't declared.

I am assuming you're talking about this...
https://nyebevannews.co.uk/swinson-f...uropean-union/

“IT LOOKS LIKE JO SWINSON’S PASSION TO STOP BREXIT OR A NO-DEAL BREXIT “AT ANY COST” HAS TERMS AND CONDITIONS APPLIED.

Swinson’s point blank and quite illogical refusal to join the cross-party coalition to prevent a no-deal Brexit has a 3.5m euro explanation. And the irony of the whole context goes to show that the LibDems are as insincere and deceitful as they ever were.”

This is political dynamite. The European Union gave a 3.5m euro donation to Transparency International, which in peak irony is supposed to be an anti corruption watchdog with a mandate to foster, erm, transparency.

It is run by Jo Swinson’s husband. Has Jo Swinson declared this conflict of interest to the House of Commons? No.

Is that a breach of House of Commons protocol? Yes.

Is it a breach of the law? Yes.

So who is Jo Swinson’s husband? His name is Duncan Hames. He is the director of policy at Transparency International UK.

[Mr K]

Nothing that all parties do anyway.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Mick

I am assuming you're talking about this...
https://nyebevannews.co.uk/swinson-f...uropean-union/

Not really a family company as the article suggests. It's a chapter of a charity.

I think she'll be fine.

https://www.transparency.org.uk/pres...-impartiality/

Originally Posted by Mr K

Nothing that all parties do anyway.

Don't see "Liberal Democrats and ALL other parties" in the news article....

---------- Post added at 22:42 ---------- Previous post was at 22:41 ----------

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Not really a family company as the article suggests. It's a chapter of a charity.

I think she'll be fine.

https://www.transparency.org.uk/pres...-impartiality/

She will never be PM, thankfully.

[nomadking]

From 2015

For most Labour candidates, the online apparatus is divided into two key components: Contact Creator, which is used to keep records of potential voters and ensure that attempts to reach them are well co-ordinated; and NationBuilder, which is primarily used to organise and mobilise volunteers.

...
“She is no way going down as a Labour voter,” Davis says, as she heads to the next name on her list. “But when she puts that cross in the box, she won’t have heard from the Conservatives round here. The only person who would have bothered is Labour, and I think that does make a difference.”

When Rowenna Davis was selected as the Labour candidate for Southampton Itchen nearly two years ago, she started with an experiment. Davis, a 30-year-old former journalist, wanted to see whether traditional Tory voters could be won over by the personal touch, and so she wrote to 300 of them – by hand.

How did they know that?


Do people want their (alleged) voting intentions and thoughts accessible by any Labour member?

It’s the data they get from canvassing I think. Obama did in 08, Tories in 2015. Pretty much all of them do it to find out where their voters are and target them specifically.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Damien

It’s the data they get from canvassing I think. Obama did in 08, Tories in 2015. Pretty much all of them do it to find out where their voters are and target them specifically.

Traditionally, the Conservatives used to be best at this but the other parties are now getting in the game.

So why are Sky News Outing in their news piece that Liberal Democrats as the ones that do it?

Why doesn't the headline say, "Political Parties using personal data"?

We had some Remainers pissed off with Cambridge Analytica harvesting data from FB users in what they claim helped leave win... But what Lib Dems are doing here is no bloody different.

From the OP link

This kind of scoring system is commonly used by political parties in the UK and the US, but new data transparency laws which allow anyone to ask for their data give an unprecedented glimpse into how a major party operates.

Originally Posted by Hugh

From the OP link

Yes, I can read - So in essence what the Liberal Democrats are doing with the data is clearly wrong, hence why they have been solely named in the news piece.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Mick

So why are Sky News Outing in their news piece that Liberal Democrats as the ones that do it?

Why doesn't the headline say, "Political Parties using personal data"?

We had some Remainers pissed off with Cambridge Analytica harvesting data from FB users in what they claim helped leave win... But what Lib Dems are doing here is no bloody different.

Actually what the Lib Dems and Labour are doing is worse than Cambridge Analytica. CA treated accounts in an "anonymous" manner. There would've been no potential negative impact on an individual. With Labour's Contact Creator, a Labour member can access details about an individual. Potentially a situation of "looking for a job and not a Labour voter, then forget it".

Originally Posted by nomadking

Actually what the Lib Dems and Labour are doing is worse than Cambridge Analytica. CA treated accounts in an "anonymous" manner. There would've been no potential negative impact on an individual. With Labour's Contact Creator, a Labour member can access details about an individual. Potentially a situation of "looking for a job and not a Labour voter, then forget it".

The issue with Cambridge Analytica is the fact the data came from apps which broke Facebook's terms of service. I.E Your data was being syphoned off from Facebook apps of your friends. Although CA weren't directly doing that themselves. People were hyping them up and also mixing in other stories about dodgy connections to foreign politicians agents and then mixing it all together with sinister music and graphics until no one really knew what the story was.

Originally Posted by Mick

Yes, I can read - So in essence what the Liberal Democrats are doing with the data is clearly wrong, hence why they have been solely named in the news piece.

I think it's that they've used these laws to target the Liberal Democrats to highlight the overall issue. The article doesn't mention any specific transgression they've made over the other parties.

I wonder what they're actually doing here. My best guess is that they have loaded the public electoral register into a computer and are cross-referencing it against their canvassing data, as well as doing some guesses based on where they live as to if they'll vote a certain way. Without canvassing data against it this is going to be useless. The electoral register doesn't contain enough information to give specific demographic information, hence why they're trying to 'guess' the first language of the voter from their name.

As with CA people are making it seem more intelligent than it actually is. Any system that tries to guess your age is clearly not at the cutting edge. Remember much smarter computer scientists develop complex AI models for the likes of Amazon but it still can't work out I don't need to buy multiple toilet seats.

Nothing new, companies have been profiling people for decades, usually deciding what you might buy rather than how you might vote, but the same basic principle.