There’s something in American politics called an “October surprise”, which refers to an event that could influence the outcome of an election. It’s named for the month of October, the height of the campaign period, when the release of negative information could derail the efforts of a candidate or an entire party. The revelation could be the work of an independent body or deliberately timed by a political rival.
With local elections just around the corner, Trinbagonian voters witnessed a local October surprise with the publication of Mindf***: Cambridge Analytica and the Plot to Break America. It’s the book written by Christopher Wylie, a former employee who exposed their involvement in the unauthorised gathering of personal information from social media users for use in political campaigns. He became the public face of the scandal and, on several occasions throughout 2018, was called to testify before investigative committees in the US and the UK. It was during one of these hearings that Mr Wylie mentioned that the government of T&T, which at the time was the under the Persad-Bissessar administration, hired the services of Cambridge Analytica (CA) in the lead-up to the 2015 elections. Who would have thought that tiny T&T would find itself centre stage in a global controversy.
Fast-forward to the press conference held two weeks ago by National Security Minister, Stuart Young. Armed with a copy of Mr Wylie’s book, and a few choice quotes, he painted what he described was a disturbing picture, one that all citizens should be gravely concerned about. According to the book, the methods that were used by CA in the American (2016) election were first implemented in Trinidad by its parent company, Strategic Communications Laboratories (SCL). It should be noted that Mr Wylie’s recounting of the work regarding T&T, or simply the “Trinidad project” as he calls it, is only a small part of his book. But he does describe it in florid and, at times, frightening ways.
As Minister Young read quotes, he appeared indignant in how we were used as guinea pigs, becoming the first casualties of a digital conquest by technology-wielding mercenaries in service to our own government. But as alarming as this narrative may be, Mr Young can’t deny that it also benefits the PNM’s re-election campaign. Whether it’s true or not, this has less to do with a violation of our privacy, which ironically the Attorney General once said that we have no implicit right to it, and more to do with portraying the UNC as a party that is willing to commit insidious acts to win an election. Now, if this sounds familiar, it’s because we’ve heard it before. The PNM’s harping on the Cambridge Analytica scandal feels like a repeat of the baseless bawlball we’ve come to know as “Emailgate”.
When Dr Rowley, then the leader of the opposition, revealed that infamous collection of electronic correspondence, it wasn’t out of a sense of patriotic duty. On the contrary, it was a calculated act in an attempt to slander the Peoples’ Partnership government under the protection of parliamentary privilege. It’s a travesty how many man-hours and taxpayer dollars were wasted in order to prove something didn’t exist! And just when we thought that chapter was finally closed, the PNM is again presenting the country with serious allegations that are either thin on specifics or difficult to verify.
Without discussing the methods that were employed by SCL/CA in data collecting and user influencing, the fact is that Mr Wylie’s account lacks substance. Remember, his book is about the American election, and names people, places, and situations as it pertains to that event. However, when it comes to such information regarding the “Trinidad project” – there’s none. And… chances are… we may never get any. Despite the police service’s launching of an investigation (yay, another one!) and the coordination with lawyers representing Mr Wylie, he is under no obligation to offer evidence. Initially, he did express a willingness to come to Trinidad and testify, but that no longer seems likely as, according to the AG, he has supposedly received threats to his life from members of the UNC.
But let’s say for a moment that he does show up, be it in person or via video-link… does he have any physical proof – company emails, official transcripts, internal memos – to back up his claims of collusion? Or are we just supposed to take his word for it? Even then, since our government is concerned with adhering to “natural justice” (their rationale for withholding the release of the Darryl Smith Report), will representatives from SCL/CA be invited to refute Mr Wylie’s allegations? Personally, I wouldn’t hold my breath for either one. This isn’t about the search for truth or to prevent something like this from happening again. After all, it’s been over a year since our country was first mentioned in the Cambridge Analytica scandal, during which nothing was done. But the release of Mr Wylie’s book has presented the PNM with an opportunity to negatively impact the UNC, essentially replicating the effects of Emailgate. That means they’ll probably drag out this “October surprise” till the general elections next year.
Then again, when it comes to our politics, nothing should surprise us anymore.
