Subscribe Sign in

New Mexico jury rules Meta misled state residents about data privacy

Engadget
1 min read Rewritten in plain language

Meta

Show what we removed Rules applied: A3×2 A4 C2 C5×2 D2 E3×3 all 30 rules
  • A New Mexico jury has found Meta violated the state's Unfair Practices Act and misled residents about their privacy and how the company handles misinformation, Reuters reports.
  • The state's original lawsuit said that Meta misrepresented what it let third-party apps do with its data, maintained privacy settings that were unclear or vague and falsely said it applied policies around hate speech equally to everyone, among other issues.
  • A judge has yet to rule how much Meta will be fined.
  • Cambridge Analytica scraping and using information from 50 million Facebook users without their consent is one of several black marks on Meta's resume, one it distanced itself from by rebranding to Meta in 2021.
  • Most recently, it settled with 47 US states over child safety concerns in an $18 billion settlement that included a $459 million payment to specifically resolve existing Cambridge Analytica lawsuits, Reuters writes.

5 sentences from our version of the report, chosen to cover it. Nothing here is written; every line is in the article below. How

Headline check

All two things this headline claims are in the report.

Figures, names and quoted words in the headline, looked for in the report itself — not in the summary above. How this is checked

The company is still paying for the Cambridge Analytica scandal.

A New Mexico jury has found Meta violated the state's Unfair Practices Act and misled residents about their privacy and how the company handles misinformation, Reuters reports. The trial was the result of a 2021 lawsuit filed by the state in response to Meta's Cambridge Analytica scandal, in which data harvested from Facebook was used to target political advertising during the 2016 election.

The state's original lawsuit said that Meta misrepresented what it let third-party apps do with its data, maintained privacy settings that were unclear or vague and falsely said it applied policies around hate speech equally to everyone, among other issues. Reuters writes that Meta's lawyers admitted the company had made mistakes with how it handled misinformation and privacy in the past, but denied it sold users' data or that it benefited from hate speech.

A judge has yet to rule how much Meta will be fined. Engadget has asked the company to comment on the case and the jury's decision. We'll update this article if we hear back.

Cambridge Analytica scraping and using information from 50 million Facebook users without their consent is one of several black marks on Meta's resume, one it distanced itself from by rebranding to Meta in 2021. The company has reached multiple settlement agreements in response to Cambridge Analytica in the US, UK and Australia. Most recently, it settled with 47 US states over child safety concerns in an $18 billion settlement that included a $459 million payment to specifically resolve existing Cambridge Analytica lawsuits, Reuters writes. New Mexico and Florida declined to participate in that part of the settlement, which allowed this trial to happen and a jury to side against Meta again.

You are reading our version, not theirs. This is Engadget's report with its verdicts and loaded words taken out. Plain description stays, and so do adjectives that carry a fact, such as "former" or "federal". The reporting, the facts and the quotations are theirs — quotations are never edited — and the indicators beside it measure this version. Hover or tap Adjectives to see every one left in the text.

How this outlet filed it, and how we rewrote it

No other newsroom we read has filed on this event, so there is nothing to compare it with yet.

Outlet Niral ScoreAdjectivesSourcingPoliticalSentimentHappiness
Engadgetas they published this story 9 1 58 -0.5 -1.7 53.7
Mundane Readneutralized from Engadget 6.8 1 58 -0.5 -1.7 53.7

Sign in to react.

Comments

Nothing here yet.

Sign in to comment.

Questions

Readers can ask a question about this story here. Questions and answers are for subscribers. Sign in to read them.

Comments are read before they appear where anything in them needs a person to look. Nothing posted here is ever deleted; a comment taken down keeps its text and the reason, so the decision can be looked at again. How this works