[IfOnlyYouKnew]

They gave private messages to Spotify and others, without consent. The Times nowhere makes, or implies, or hints at those companies abusing that data, although the possibility is obvious. Sharing the most private data is already a violation of trust, privacy, Facebook’s public statements, and possibly law.

If you think “sharing data with X without consent” implies that data being misused by X, then that’s a process happening entirely within your head. I agree that it an obvious thought to have, which is probably why so many people have problems distinguishing what they read from what the words made them think off.

This obvious thought process is also why I’m somewhat certain the reporters pondered the possibility, just like you and me. But they decided against putting it in their article, sticking only to the specific facts they had the internal documents and 60 sources to verify.