27 Data-Slurping Facts BuzzFeed Doesn't Want You To Know!

'Fun' quizzes drill down into your MENTAL HEALTH PROBLEMS


When Buzzfeed first began to offer the world a constant free stream of inane listicles, cat pics and funny fail GIFs, it seemed too good to be true.

Yet it turns out that the world's biggest content aggregator isn't just shiny and happy – it's curious too. In fact, according to a digital marketer, Big Buzzfeed is watching us all.

On his blog, e-commerce and digital marketing expert Dan Barker warned that Buzzfeed was in fact wolfing down large amounts of its readers' data.

"When you visit BuzzFeed, they record lots of information about you," he warned. "Most websites record some information. BuzzFeed record a whole tonne."

Barker also took the following screenshot, which he says shows the info Buzzfeed collects via Google Analytics and its own internal stats.

He said the key word to look for is "scope". "A scope of 1 means it’s something recorded about the user," he claimed. "Number 2 means it’s recorded about the current visit, while 'page' means it’s just a piece of information about the page itself."

The information captured includes a person's age, whether they are logged into Facebook or not and which country they are in.

But next comes the "scary bit".

Barker cites a quiz entitled "How Privileged Are You?", which is a list of tickbox questions designed to work out how white, male and heterosexual (and therefore privileged, in the weird argot of Twitter) a person might be. In your correspondent's view, the quiz wants everyone but mixed-race, wheelchair-bound, dirt-poor dyslexic transsexuals to feel thoroughly guilty about every single slight moment of happiness they have enjoyed.

It appears, according to Barker's analysis, that data gathered from respondents' answers - no matter how sensitive they are - are stored alongside all the other personal information which Buzzfeed routinely collects. The site's privacy policy not only states that it "may collect geo-location data" from surfers, but also that it "may link location data to other information we have collected about you."

"If I had access to the BuzzFeed Google Analytics data," Barker said, "I could query data for people who got to the end of the quiz and indicated – by not checking that particular answer – that they have had an eating disorder. Or that they have tried to change their gender.”

Would you really feel comfortable telling an advertising company about whether you had undergone gender reassignment therapy or had been prescribed anti-psychotic drugs? Probably not, but that doesn't matter - more than two million people have already splurged all to Big Buzzfeed in the privilege quiz alone.

"I suspect this particular quiz would have had less than 2 million views if everyone completing it realised every click was being recorded and could potentially be reported on later – whether that data is fully identifiable back to individual users, or pseudonymous, or even totally anonymous," Barker added.

Buzzfeed insists that the data is anonymously stored and that is it only interested in information in the aggregate, rather than collecting lots of stuff about individuals.

Dao Nguyen, head of "growth and data" at Buzzfeed, left a comment on Barker's blog which said:

We do not in fact record that it is “you” browsing the site. The string sent to GA is not your username but an anonymized string that is not linked in any way to your account, email address or other personally identifiable information. We are only interested in data in the aggregate form. Who a specific user is and what he or she is doing on the site is actually a useless piece of information for us.

Speaking of data-harvesting media companies, who can forget the rise of Mark Zuckerberg? He looked like an angelic, virginal nerd until it was revealed he was actually a data-grabber who couldn't believe “dumb fucks” would just hand over all their personal info. ®

Similar topics


Other stories you might like

  • Lunar rocks brought to Earth by China's Chang'e 5 show Moon's volcanoes were recently* active

    * Just a couple of billion years

    The Moon remained volcanically active much later than previously thought, judging from fragments of rocks dating back two billion years that were collected by China's Chang’e 5 spacecraft.

    The Middle Kingdom's space agency obtained about 1.72 kilograms (3.8 pounds) of lunar material from its probe that returned to Earth from the Moon in December. These samples gave scientists their first chance to get their hands on fresh Moon material in the 40 years since the Soviet Union's Luna 24 mission brought 170 grams (six ounces) of regolith to our home world in 1976.

    The 47 shards of basalt rocks retrieved by Chang'e 5 were estimated to be around two billion years old using radiometric dating techniques. The relatively young age means that the Moon was still volcanically active up to 900 million years later than previous estimates, according to a team of researchers led by the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS).

    Continue reading
  • Centre for Computing History apologises to customers for 'embarrassing' breach

    Website patched following phishing scam, no financial data exposed

    The Centre for Computing History (CCH) in Cambridge, England, has apologised for an "embarrassing" breach in its online customer datafile, though thankfully no payment card information was exposed.

    The museum for computers and video games said it was notified that a unique email address used to book tickets via its website "has subsequently received a phishing email that looked like it came from HSBC."

    "Our investigation has revealed that our online customer datafile has been compromised and the email addresses contained within are now in the hands of spammers," says the letter to visitors from Jason Fitzpatrick, CEO and trustee at CCH dated 19 October.

    Continue reading
  • Ancient with a dash of modern: We joined the Royal Navy to find there's little new in naval navigation

    Following the Fleet Navigating Officers' course

    Boatnotes II The art of not driving your warship into the coast or the seabed is a curious blend of the ancient and the very modern, as The Reg discovered while observing the Royal Navy's Fleet Navigating Officers' (FNO) course.

    Held aboard HMS Severn, "sea week" of the FNO course involves taking students fresh from classroom training and putting them on the bridge of a real live ship – and then watching them navigate through progressively harder real-life challenges.

    "It's about finding where the students' capacity limit is," FNO instructor Lieutenant Commander Mark Raeburn told The Register. Safety comes first: the Navy isn't interested in having navigators who can't keep up with the pressures and volume of information during pilotage close to shore – or near enemy minefields.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021