The members of parliament on the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee have grilled the chief executive of Cambridge Analytica addition to its role in the u.s. election and brexit.
The controversial company is credited by some with the help of Donald Trump win the presidency.
His methods of profiling and targeting of citizens in the political campaigns were discussed.
Alexander Nix said that the company was doing was no different from practices in the advertising industry.
Cambridge Analytica claims to have up to five thousand points of data on all adults in the united states, including the car that they own, health concerns, and what media they consume.
It combines these data purchased from firms that collect such information from digital footprints that are created by people in line with pyschographics to “micro-target” individuals.
Cambridge Analytica gained notoriety for the use of these methods in Donald Trump’s presidential campaign
Some have raised concerns that the methods used to market products and brands in the advertising industry have now been transferred to the political arena.
Mr Nix said that the analysis of the data of his company used in the Trumpet of the campaign have also been widely used in the election of President Obama to the campaign, and Hillary Clinton has also employed “hundreds of scientific data”.
“I think people see our work as a negative because the client is polarized,” he said to the Deputies.
“This is micro-targeting of voters and the techniques have been used in advertising for decades. We took their best practices and duplicate them to a political party.”
“We match data with the major research-quantitative application of the public according to their preferences, and to gather micro-target people”
“There has been a misunderstanding of what we do. We use data and technology to engage with voters in a more informed, and relevant. That can only be good for politics and democracy.”
He has also denied that the company has undertaken work on the UK referendum.
In a letter published shortly before the meeting of the committee, Mr Nix said: “Cambridge Analytica had no involvement in the referendum has not been adopted by any campaign, and does not provide services (paid or unpaid) for a campaign.”
The deputies spend a large portion of the time, the reconsideration of the denial.
Before working on Donald Trump’s campaign, Cambridge Analytica also worked with the Republican candidate Ted Cruz.
One of the Members has asked if the “psychological profile” as used in the Ted Cruz campaign by giving the example of play on the fear of women being attacked in their own home in order to support his firm stance on the possession of weapons – a fear-mongering because he uses fear as a tool.
“The presentation of a fact underpinned by an emotion is not fearmongering,” said Mr Nix.
He denied that the firm had a political agenda, saying he avoided political campaigns in the united KINGDOM and to all the political forces of the work was undertaken “for the main political parties, the freedom and regularity of the democracies”.
Mr Nix has been grilled by Mps over the way the company has created profiles of 240 million Americans, with a particular interest if the company has used Facebook data.
He denied that the company has used data on the social network giant, but said he has used the platform to conduct surveys.
Exactly how Cambridge Analytica created detailed profiles of nearly 240 million Americans remains a mystery, but WE professor David Carroll is to try to shed a little light on it by the reconquest of its personal data to the company.
He is able to do that because its data has been processed in the united KINGDOM and is therefore subject to a tightening of EU data laws.
Privacy experts believe the case could set a precedent in explaining how the marketing companies collect and use citizens ‘ data.