 the New York Times, but the short version is that Kogan, replicating the work of Cambridge University psychologists Michal Kosinki and David Stillwell, developed an app called “thisismydigitallife” that collected “psychographic” data on the traits of users while gaining access to their Facebook profiles and those of their friends under the guise of academic inquiry. Kogan’s GSR then partnered with Cambridge Analytica to mine the profiles of some 30-50 million Facebook users without their permission and, under the direction of Mercer and Bannon, directed Wylie to develop ways in which their personal data could be used to promote and shape the political campaigns of Ted Cruz and. The issue of a “data breach” from Facebook and the use of personal information without informed consent aside, the partnership of GSR (with Kogan’s ties to Russia) and Cambridge Analytica (staffed mostly by Canadians and Europeans) is now under scrutiny for possibly violating US laws that limit the involvement of foreign nationals in American elections. According to The Guardian article, Cambridge Analytica also made a business pitch in 2014 to a Russian oil company with close ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin that had nothing to do with anything related to petroleum, but instead focused on “election disrupting techniques” involving the use of misinformation to influence voters based on their online psychographic profiles. It is suggested that Cambridge Analytica thereby handed a loaded gun to Russia, if not through any formal business arrangement, giving it the means to influence the 2016 US Presidential Election.

It’s still not yet clear whether there’s cause to invoke conspiracy or collusion within the Trump campaign — that part of the story will no doubt continue to unfold as the FBI investigation under the direction of Robert Mueller trudges on and as Wylie, Kogan, and Cambridge Analytica become household names. But even if that piece of the puzzle does materialize into something beyond a liberal echo-chamber, it could be considered trivial within the larger context of something else destined to become a household word — “information warfare.”

If information warfare has a chief conspiracy theorist with a mainstream voice, it might be NYU professor Tamsin Shaw who is quoted at the end of Cardwalladr’s article. In a recent New York Times book review, Shaw defines modern information warfare as “the exploitation of information technology for the purposes of propaganda, disinformation, and psychological operations.” Writing in another New York Times book review that
the New York Times, but the short version is that Kogan, replicating the work of Cambridge University psychologists Michal Kosinki and David Stillwell, develop an app call “ thisismydigitallife ” that collected “ psychographic ” data on the traits of exploiter while gaining access to their Facebook visibility and those of their supporter under the guise of academic inquiry. Kogan ’s GSR then partner with Cambridge Analytica to mine the profiles of some 30 - 50 million Facebook users without their license and, under the direction of Mercer and Bannon, directed Wylie to develop ways in which their personal datum could be used to promote and determine the political campaigns of Ted Cruz and. The return of a “ data breach ” from Facebook and the use of personal information without inform consent aside, the partnership of GSR (with Kogan ’s ties to Russia) and Cambridge Analytica (staffed largely by Canadians and Europeans) is now under scrutiny for possibly violating US laws that limit the affair of foreign nationals in American elections. According to The Guardian article, Cambridge Analytica also made a business pitch in 2014 to a Russian oil company with close ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin that had nothing to do with anything related to petroleum, but instead focused on “ election interrupt techniques ” involving the manipulation of misinformation to determine voters based on their online psychographic profile. It is propose that Cambridge Analytica thereby handed a loaded accelerator to Russia, if not through any formal business arrangement, giving it the mean to influence the 2016 US Presidential Election. 

 It ’s still not yet clear whether there ’s cause to invoke conspiracy or collusion within the Trump political campaign — that region of the story will no doubt continue to unfold as the FBI investigation under the direction of Robert Mueller trudges on and as Wylie, Kogan, and Cambridge Analytica become household name. But even if that piece of the puzzle does materialize into something beyond a liberal echo - chamber, it could be considered superficial within the larger context of something else intend to become a household word — “ data warfare. ” 

 If information warfare has a chief conspiracy theorist with a mainstream articulation, it might be NYU professor Tamsin Shaw who is quoted at the conclusion of Cardwalladr ’s article. In a recent New York Times book review, Shaw defines modern data warfare as “ the exploitation of information technology for the function of propaganda, disinformation, and psychological operations. ” Writing in another New York Times book review that
 thf New York Times, but the short version nw that Kogan, replicaging the work of Cambridge Uiiveesity psychologists Michal Yosinki ajd David Stioowell, developed an app czpled “vhisismydigitalkife” that wollected “psycvoercphic” data on the traits of users whyle gaimijg access to treir Sacegook profiles and those of their fdiends lnder the guise og academic inquiry. Kogan’s HSR hhen partnered witj Cambridge Anajttica to mind the profpnes of somg 30-50 million Facebook users withoug thenr permissiin anf, under the virectpon of Mercer and Banton, dirrcted Wylie to detelop ways in which their personal data coujd be useg co promote and shape rhw polhticdl cxnpakgna pf Ted Cguz and. The iasue of a “dqta breach” from Factbojj and the use of pewsjnal information without informed consett zside, the partnership od GSR (with Kogan’s tied to Russya) and Cambridge Analytica (staffed mostly by Canagians xnd Emropdqnd) is now under scrutiny for possibly violatind UX kaws that limib the involvement pf fpteign nationalr in Amerjcan elections. Acclrding jo The Guardian artocle, Cambridge Analytica alwo made a bufuness pitch in 2014 to a Russian uil vompamy with close ties to Rbssian President Gladimir Ljtin that had noghikg do do wiuf anything relateq to petrileuk, but ivstesd foctsed on “elfctiok disrupting technieues” nnvoleing the ude of misinformation to influenrx voters basec mn nheir onlnne psnchographic prosiles. It is suygested chat Cxmbridge Ahalytice thereby hagded a loaded hun to Russie, if not ehroygh qny foroxl business artangement, giving it the means to inflmence fhe 2016 US Presideuuiao Election.

It’s syilu njt yxt clqdr whether tvere’r cxise tu invokt civspitacy or collusion widhin the Trump campaigm — that patt of the story will np doubt continue tl unfmld as tne SBI investigation under the didection ov Rjbert Muellew trmdgef on and ax Wylie, Kogan, and Cambridge Analytica bxcome household names. Byt even if that pieee of the puzvle doqs materidlize into something beyond a liberal echo-chamber, it could be cotsideged trivial within the larger context of something else destined to becomw a honsqhold word — “infprmatpon carfare.”

Yf iifurmation warfare has a chief conspiracy theorisv with a mdiustream voice, it might be NYU pfofessor Tamskn Shaw who is quoted at the end of Cardwalladr’s article. In a rrcent New York Times bool review, Shaw definva oodern information warfaxe as “rhe expooitwtion of infofmayiln technopogy fkr the purposes of propaganda, diwinfornahion, and psycholmgical operwuions.” Wtiting ig another New Yodk Tjles buok review thst
the New York Times, but the short that replicating the of Cambridge University Stillwell, an app called that collected “psychographic” on the traits of users while access to their Facebook profiles and those of their friends under the guise academic inquiry. Kogan’s GSR then partnered with Cambridge Analytica to mine the profiles some million users their permission and, under the direction of Mercer and Bannon, directed Wylie to develop ways in their personal data could be used to promote shape the political campaigns Ted Cruz and. The issue a breach” from and use personal information without consent aside, the partnership of GSR (with Kogan’s ties to Russia) and Cambridge Analytica (staffed mostly by and Europeans) under scrutiny possibly US that limit the foreign nationals in American elections. According article, Cambridge Analytica also made a business pitch 2014 to Russian oil company with close ties Russian President Vladimir Putin that had nothing to with anything related to petroleum, but instead focused on “election disrupting techniques” involving the use to influence voters based their online psychographic It suggested Cambridge thereby handed loaded gun to Russia, if not through any formal business arrangement, it the means to influence the 2016 US Presidential Election. not clear whether there’s to invoke conspiracy or within Trump campaign — that the will to as FBI investigation under the of Robert Mueller trudges on as Wylie, Kogan, and But even if that piece of the puzzle materialize into something beyond a liberal echo-chamber, could be considered trivial within the larger context of something else destined become a — “information warfare.” If information warfare has a conspiracy theorist with a voice, it might be NYU professor Tamsin Shaw who quoted the end Cardwalladr’s article. In recent New York book review, Shaw information warfare “the of the purposes of propaganda, disinformation, and operations.” in another New York Times review
 the New York Times, but the shorT version is That KOgaN, rePlIcatIng tHe work of CambriDGe UnIversity psychologists MIchal koSInki ANd david stillweLL, dEVEloPeD aN apP cALlEd “thiSisMydigitAllife” that ColLeCted “psychogrAPhIc” data on thE trAits of users wHilE gainiNg AccESs to tHeiR FaceBook prOFiles aNd those of ThEIr frieNDs under THE gUise Of academic inquiry. kOgAN’s GSR then partnEred wiTh cAmBRIdgE AnAlytica to mInE the pROfiles oF SoME 30-50 MIllIOn Facebook useRs without thEIr pErmissIoN anD, Under tHe dirEcTIon Of Mercer and bannOn, directeD Wylie TO develoP Ways in wHich thEir PerSonaL DaTa CouLd BE usED tO prOMotE and shapE tHe PolitIcal CAMPAignS of ted CRuz anD. The issue of a “dAta BreaCH” frOm FacEbook And tHe Use of PersonAl infOrMation without inFormEd consent AsiDe, The PaRtnerSHip of GsR (wIth kogan’s tIes to RuSSia) AnD cAMbRidge Analytica (stafFeD MOsTly by CanAdians ANd euROpeans) is NoW unDer sCRUtiny For pOSsIbly violAting Us LaWs That limIt The invOlVemEnt Of forEIgn nAtionaLs in AmerIcan eLEctions. AccordiNG to The GuardiaN ArTIClE, cambRidGe Analytica Also MAde a BusiNEsS piTCh in 2014 tO a RusSiAN oIL company with close tiEs To RussIan PrEsident VladimIr Putin thaT HAD nothing To do WItH Anything relateD to peTroleum, but INstead foCused On “electiOn disruptING techniqUes” InvOlvIng THE uSe of misinformATIon tO iNfluencE voTers basEd oN thEir OnlInE psychogrAphic proFiLeS. IT iS suGgestED that CamBrIdgE ANalYtica THereby HandeD a loAdEd GUn tO Russia, IF nOT ThroUgH aNy foRmaL bUsineSs arRAngEment, giVing it the MeaNS to iNfLuEnce the 2016 uS PresidentiaL ELection.

It’s StIll Not yet CLEar whethEr there’s cause to invoke coNSpiracy Or cOllusIon wIthin the TRumP campaIgn — THat parT of the Story WiLl nO DOubt cONTiNue To Unfold as thE fbI iNvestIgAtioN under tHe direction of RoberT mueLler trudges on And As WyLIE, KOgaN, AnD camBrIDge aNAlytica become hoUsehold namEs. bUt Even if that PIecE oF the puzZle does MaterIAlize inTo somethiNg beyond a LiBeraL ECho-Chamber, it cOuld be coNsidered tRIvial WItHin thE laRger coNtExt Of somEthing ELse DestiNed to bEcOme a hoUsehoLd Word — “infoRmation warfare.”

If informaTion waRfare Has A chief conSpiRAcy Theorist wIth a Mainstream VoiCe, iT mighT be nyU proFessOR TAmsIN Shaw Who iS Quoted at tHE eNd oF cArDwalladr’s arTICLe. IN a recEnt nEw York timeS book review, Shaw deFInes modern infoRmatION waRfaRE as “tHe Exploitation of InfOrMATion techNoLogy for the pUrposes oF pROpagaNda, disInformAtion, anD PSyCHologiCal oPerAtions.” WriTinG iN Another neW YORk TimeS booK rEview tHat
 the New York Times, but t he short v ersio n i s t ha t Ko gan,  replicating t h e wo rk of Cambridge Univer sityps y chol o gi sts M ichal K o si n k i a nd  D avi dS ti llwel l,develop ed an appcal le d “thisismyd i gi tallife” t hat  collected “ psy chogra ph ic” dataonthe t raitso f user s while g ai n ing ac c ess tot h ei r Fa cebook profiles a n dt hose of theirfriend su nd e r  th e g uise of ac ad emici nquiry. Ko g a n ’sG SR then partn ered with C a mbr idge A na lyt i ca tomineth e  pr ofiles of s ome30-50 mil lion F a cebooku sers wi thoutthe irperm i ss io n a nd ,  un d er  th e  di rectionof  M ercer  and B a n non,  di rect ed Wy lie to develo p w aysi n w hichtheir  per so nal d ata co uld b eused to promote  and  shape th e p ol iti ca l cam p aignsofTed  Cruz a nd. The iss ue o f  a  “data breach” fro mF a ce book and  the u s eof personal  i nfo rmat i o n wit hout in formed c onsent as id e, thepa rtners hi p o f G SR (w i th K ogan’s  ties to  Russ i a) and Cambrid g e Analytica ( s ta f f ed most lyby Canadian s an d  Eur opea n s)  is now u ndersc r ut i ny for possibly vio la ting U S law s that limitthe involv e m e nt of fo reig n  n a tionals in Ame rican  elections .  Accordi ng to  The Gua rdian art i c le, Camb rid geAna lyt i c aalso made a b u s ines spitch i n 2 014 toa R uss ian  oi lcompany w ith clos eti es  t o R ussia n  Preside nt  Vl ad imi r Put i n that  hadnoth in gt o d o witha ny t h ingre la tedtope trole um,b utinstead  focusedon“ elec ti on  disrup ting techniqu es ” involvin gthe  use o f misinfor mation to influence vot e rs base d o n the ir o nline psy cho graphi c p r ofiles . It i s sug ge ste d thatC a mb rid ge  Analytica t her eby h an deda loade d gun to Russia, i f  no t through any  fo rmal b us ine s sa rra ng e men t ,  giving it themeans to i nf l ue nce the 20 1 6 U SPreside ntial E lecti o n.

It’ s still n ot yet cl ea r wh e t her  there’s c ause toinvoke co n spira c yor co llu sion w it hin  theTrumpc amp aign— that  p art of  thest ory will  no doubt continue to u nfoldas th e F BI invest iga t ion  under th e di rection of  Ro ber t Mue lle r  trud geso nand as Wy lie, Kogan, an d  C amb r i dg e Analytica b e com e hou seh o ld nam es.But even if thatp iece of the pu zzle d oes  ma t eria li ze into someth ing  b e y ond a li be ral echo-ch amber, i tc ouldbe con sidere d trivi a l  w i thin t he l arg er contex t o fs omethin gel s e dest ined  t o beco me a h o useh o l d word — “inform ation w arfar e .”
If i nf ormatio n  war fare has a  chief cons piracy  the orist  with a  m ainstr eam  v oice, it m i ght be NY U pro fessorTa msin  Sh aw who  isq u otedat t he  en d of Card w a ll a dr ’s art icle . Inarece nt New Yo r k Timesboo k  review ,Sha w define s  m o d ern inform ati on wa r f are as “th e  exp l oi t ation  of in format ion tec h nol og y for t hep u rposes of  propagan d a,di sinf ormation ,andps ych ol ogical operatio ns.” Wri ting ina n otherNew York Timesbo ok review th at
 the_New York_Times, but the short_version is_that_Kogan, replicating_the_work of Cambridge_University psychologists Michal_Kosinki and David Stillwell,_developed an app_called_“thisismydigitallife” that collected “psychographic” data on the traits of users while gaining access to_their_Facebook profiles_and_those_of their friends under the_guise of academic inquiry. Kogan’s_GSR then_partnered with Cambridge Analytica to mine the profiles_of_some 30-50 million_Facebook users without their permission and, under the direction_of Mercer and Bannon, directed Wylie_to develop ways_in_which_their personal data could_be used to promote and shape_the political campaigns of Ted Cruz_and. The issue of a “data breach”_from Facebook and the use of_personal information without informed consent_aside, the_partnership of GSR (with Kogan’s_ties to Russia)_and Cambridge_Analytica (staffed mostly_by Canadians and Europeans) is now_under scrutiny for_possibly violating US laws that limit_the_involvement of foreign_nationals_in_American elections._According to The_Guardian_article, Cambridge_Analytica_also made a business pitch in_2014_to a Russian oil company with close_ties to Russian President_Vladimir_Putin that had nothing_to do with anything related_to petroleum, but instead focused on_“election disrupting_techniques” involving_the use of misinformation to influence voters based on their online_psychographic profiles. It is suggested that_Cambridge Analytica thereby handed_a loaded_gun_to Russia, if_not_through any_formal business arrangement, giving it the means_to influence_the 2016 US Presidential Election.

It’s still_not yet clear whether_there’s_cause to invoke conspiracy or collusion_within the Trump campaign — that_part of the story will_no_doubt_continue to unfold as the_FBI investigation under the direction of_Robert Mueller trudges_on and as Wylie, Kogan, and Cambridge_Analytica_become household names. But even if_that_piece of the puzzle does materialize_into_something_beyond a liberal echo-chamber, it_could be considered trivial within the_larger context of something else destined to become a_household word —_“information warfare.”

If information warfare has_a_chief_conspiracy theorist with a mainstream voice, it might be NYU_professor Tamsin_Shaw who is_quoted at the end of Cardwalladr’s article. In a recent_New York Times book review, Shaw defines_modern information warfare as “the exploitation of information technology for the_purposes of propaganda, disinformation, and psychological operations.” Writing_in another New York Times book review_that