8 ★ FTWeekend 9 November/10 November 2019
Yeltsin’s favourite soap
opera on Vietnamese TV
Here’s an even better story for Gillian
Tett (“What a Mexican soap star taught
me about globalisation”, November 2).
Many years ago, a friend of mine was
sent to Hanoi by the Mexican Ministry
of Foreign Affairs to re-establish
diplomatic relations between Mexico
and Vietnam. As the days went by and
he sat bored to tears in his hotel room
waiting for the Vietnamese to call him,
he couldn’t avoid watching TV, even
though it was all in Vietnamese,
obviously. As he switched on the set
one day, he recognised Veronica Castro,
one of Mexico’s most famous telenovela
faces. To his amazement, he realised
that theLos Ricos También Lloran
telenovela had been dubbed into
Russian (it was apparently Boris
Yeltsin’s favourite TV programme, to
the point that he is said to have
cancelled a cabinet meeting in order to
meet Ms Castro, who happened to be
visiting Moscow).
Since the Vietnamese had no way of
re-dubbing the whole thing into
Vietnamese, the action was stopped
every few minutes so that aVietnamese announcer could quickly
summarise the plot so far for the
public. Needless to say, my friend
thought watching a Mexican telenovela
dubbed into Russian and summarised
in Vietnamese was a wonderful way to
pass the time (for a while, at any rate).
Pedro Haas
Los Angeles, CA, USChoose more Lunchers
from outside the ‘elite’
I really enjoyed theLunch ith thew gilet
jaunePriscillia Ludosky. The increase
in inequality, and rage of those who feel
left behind, are among the key issues of
our times. Can I therefore suggest you
continue interviewing people who are
not “global metropolitan elites” to help
us FT readers understand the world in
a more balanced way?
I’d suggest having Lunch with
steel workers, nurses, teachers,
refugees, police officers, farmers.
While I do really enjoy the great
interviews with captains of industry,
policymakers, intellectuals and artists,
I think it is only healthy to get out of
the intellectual comfort zone of the
world views of similar metropolitans. Itmay also make for good venue
suggestions outside capital cities.
Sam Desimpel
Princip.al,
Brussels, BelgiumNot a hint of impropriety
in a celebration of beauty
Clara Hernanz’s otherwise excellent
introduction to “The Girl From
Ipanema” (The Life of a Song, FT Life
and Arts, November 2) is soured by the
description of the songwriter’s lyrical
appreciation of the girl in question as
“creepy” because he was nearly 50 and
she a teenager. The song — and its
genesis — is a celebration of youthful
beauty: there is not a hint of
impropriety in it.
Does Ms Hernanz think an older
man has no place appreciating youth
and beauty? Or does she think he has
no right to express his thoughts? May I
recommend to her the comment by
great US jurist Oliver Wendell Holmes,
who, at 94, on seeing a pretty girl
across the street, murmured: “What I
wouldn’t give to be 70 again.”
Mark Revelle
Southill, Beds, UKI’m afraid that in his column
(November 2) onBrexit becoming a
Brino Brexit in name only — Simon—
Kuper betrays a misreading of the
actual workings of the matter at hand.
His key arguments on parliament after
the snap election and the consequences
of a no-deal Brexit in terms of a lacking
trade agreement, in particular, are
erroneous.
First, he expresses his confidence
that after the withdrawal agreement
was ratified, a majority of MPs would
then press for a smooth, frictionless
trade deal with the EU. Not so. If Boris
Johnson’s withdrawal agreement
passes, that logically necessitates a
Conservative majority in the first place;yet regarding the composition of such a
majority after countless moderate
Tories have decided not to stand again
in the coming election, that very
Conservative majority would then be
most unlikely to press for a soft Brexit,
least of all for subverting the exit from
the EU customs union and single
market just written into law. If, in turn,
another hung parliament obtains, the
withdrawal agreement will be dead in
the water anyway.
Second, Mr Kuper says that a no-deal
Brexit with regard to a trade agreement
would see the UK asking the EU for the
resuscitation of some kind of
relationship, its return into the
customs unions and or the singlemarket supposedly included. That is
not how the withdrawal agreement
works: once out, Britain is a third
country from the perspective of
Brussels.
For it to resuscitate its former
relationship with the EU or even parts
thereof, the UK would need no less
than to rejoin, yet that would be
possible after years of negotiation only.
In the meantime, Brexit would be
everything but a Brino — in fact, it
would be precisely the hard version
that business is justly fearing.
Jakob Steffen
Owner and Managing Director,
J S Research,
Wuppertal, GermanyBrexit would be everything but ‘in name only’
Letters
SATURDAY9 NOVEMBER 2019Email: [email protected]
Include daytime telephone number and full address
Corrections: [email protected]
If you are not satisfied with the FT’s response to your complaint, you can appeal
to the FT Editorial Complaints Commissioner: [email protected]The French Revolution of 1789 and
Russian Revolution of 1917 overthrew
rotten political orders, promised a per-
manent transformation of the human
condition and descended into civil war,
terror and dictatorship. By contrast,
the pro-democracy revolutions that
toppled communism in central and
eastern Europe in 1989 were over-
whelmingly peaceful in method and
practical in intent. In their fundamen-
tal goals — to restore national sover-
eignty, recover political freedom and
regain civic dignity in countries denied
all three by Soviet imperialism after
the second world war — the 1989 revo-
lutions were successful and deserve to
becelebratedassuchtoday.
The events of November 9 1989,
when the Berlin Wall came down, hold
aspecialsignificanceforGermans.This
was the first non-violent turn to liberty
and democracy in German history. For
Germans, however, November 9 was
and remains a day with other, darker
connotations. It was the day a republic
was proclaimed in 1918 — a republic
that fell to the monstrous evil of the
Nazisjustover14yearslater.
November9wasalsothedayofAdolf
Hitler’s Beer Hall Putsch in 1923. It was
the day ofKristallnacht, the savage
assault on Jews and their property in
- Germans recognise the need
never to forget these moments, at the
same time as they honour the coura-
geous ordinary people whose peaceful
protests in East Berlin, Leipzig and
other cities of the former East Ger-
many brought down one of the Soviet
bloc’smostrepressivepolicestates.
With the perspective of time we can
see that not all the high hopes of 1989
have been fulfilled, either in central
and eastern Europe or in the wider
community of free-market democra-
cies. It is fashionable to point the finger
at semi-authoritarian nationalists,
nativists and populists in central and
eastern Europe, but the truth is that
these malignant types are no less com-
mon in western Europe, the US and
beyond. Declining trust in public insti-
tutions and the ravages of social and
economic inequality present chal-
lenges for older and newer democra-
ciesalike.
There are good reasons to fault the
western policymakersof 1989 for
assuming that the world, or most of it,
wasthenonanunstoppablepathtolib-
eral democracy and capitalist prosper-
ity. Thesystemic financial crisis of
2008 nd its political and social reper-a
cussions put paid to such complacency,
reminding us not to take for granted
either the wisdom of politicians or the
smoothfunctioningofmarkets.
It is overlooked that, while 1989 was
agloriousyearforEurope,itwasatrag-
edy for China, whose rulers crushed
the Tiananmen Square protests ithw
massive loss of life. Yet 30 years later,
China’s state-guided capitalism, but-
tressedbyone-partyruleandtheuseof
advanced technology to disable dis-
sent, has raised both living standards
andthenation’sglobalinfluence.
For its part, the EU is right to admon-
ish central and eastern European gov-
ernments that take a high-handed
approach to democracy and the rule of
law. The EU is a community of values
or it is nothing. However, western
Europeanscanandmustdoabetterjob
of reassuring their neighbours that
they do not think of them as second-
classEuropeans.
Europe must not give in to cultural
defeatism because of its homegrown
troubles, changing US attitudes
towards the transatlantic alliance and
the rise of antagonistic great powers.
Tearing down the Iron Curtain in 1989
ranks among the greatest achieve-
ments of modern European history. To
preserve and build on the gains of that
unforgettableyearistoday’stask.Europeans should build on the liberties gained in that glorious year
In 1848, it was the lustre of gold which
luredthousandsto California. Today,
cutting-edge technology is the Golden
State’s draw, especially in the Bay Area.
But Silicon Valley’s limited housing
supply is squeezing out locals. It risks
undermining outsiders’ access to the
tech boom and is contributing to a
surge in homelessness that is shaming
a region that is a byword for wealth and
innovation. An eye-catching$2.5bn
donation by Apple o the state thist
weekispartofabroad,ifbelated,effort
by Big Tech companies to support local
communities. Building more housing,
however, will require overcoming cur-
rentresidents’resistance.
Apple said $2bn of its donation
would go towards an affordable hous-
ing fund and helping first-time buyers.
Smaller amounts are set aside for
homelessness and a specific Silicon
Valley housing fund. Earlier this year,
Facebook and Google pledged $1bn
each for similar initiatives in Califor-
nia. To the north, Microsoft offered
$500m to tackle the housing crisis in
SeattleinJanuary.
San Franciscans face median house
prices of$1.6m, six times the national
average. Big Tech companies are often
blamed, and their high wages have cer-
tainly played a role in inflating prices.
The far bigger issue is a housing deficit
that stretches back decades, the result
of zoning laws restricting new residen-
tialbuilding.
Current residents and local politi-
cians have stymied attempts to change
them, concerned about increased con-
gestion, and the belief that they give
the state government too much power.
In May, a state bill toreduce local gov-
ernments’ capacity to block develop-
mentwasshelveduntil2020.
The housing crisis isnot unique to
the Bay Area. Across California and in
other tech-driven cities such as Seattle,
the construction of affordable housing
is not keeping pace with demand from
new residents. But San Francisco’s
restrictive laws make it the most acute
example. Some residents are voting
with their feet and leaving the state.
Public servants are among those which
Apple wants to help with its first-time
buyer scheme. Without more housing,
San Francisco risks seeing the busi-
nesses which drove its growth relocate
tolessexpensivelocales.
The lack of affordable housing has
also exacerbated the homelessness
problem. Official statistics show that
the number of people living in vehicles
such as trailers, or even cars, has
increased by 45 per cent since 2017. By
last year, California hadnearly a quar-
terofthetotalUShomelesspopulation.
ThetechcapitaloftheUSisjustaswell-
known for tent cities. Seattle also suf-
fers from this problem,with the third-
largest homeless population by
numberinthecountryin2018.
Big Tech’s donations look impres-
sive, but simply making more cash
available for the state government will
not solve the underlying issues. Com-
panies also need to work in collabora-
tion with local authorities to convince
recalcitrant residents that develop-
ment is not inherently negative. They
candesignhousingwhichwillnotexert
pressure on existing services while
helping to address the transport crisis
that has been another byproduct of the
Bay Area’s boom. Google’s plan for a
community in San Jose calledDown-
town West ould include houses,w
shops,andofficespace.
Work should not stop at the edge of
cities. Regional visions of development
should be pursued, including better
transportnetworksandhome-building
further afield. The West Coast offers
some of the most economically
dynamic cities in the US. Yet unless the
housingproblemsareaddressed,many
peoplewillfindthemselvesshutout.State government still has to pull its weight in changing zoning laws
Freedom, democracy
and the legacies of 1989
San Francisco’s housing
crisis needs political will
Five years ago, it seemed Facebook
could do little wrong: the social media
titan had recently celebrated its 10th
anniversary and its wunderkind
founder Mark Zuckerberg was
building an empire with a panache
that left observers stunned.
How things change. Last month Mr
Zuckerberg was under fire again from
lawmakers in Washington — this time
over Facebook’s plans to build its
digital currency, Libra. Separately, the
tech group is under attack for its
decision to allow false or misleading
political advertising on its platform —
and is still haunted by the 2018
Cambridge Analytica data scandal.
Now there is another embarrassing
setback: a project that Facebook
launched last year as a “new model of
industry-academic partnerships”,
designed to study “the effect of social
media on democracy and elections”,
seems to be falling apart. The
initiative, Social Science One,
promised to allow academics from
across the world access to the private
anonymised data of 2bn Facebook
users, but the philanthropic
foundations that originally backed the
project are threatening to withdraw
funding because Facebook has been
“unable to deliver” the data. Nate
Persily, a Stanford academic involved
in the project, concedes that
Facebook’s privacy concerns over how
to share user data were “not
frivolous”. Even so, the episode has
left many academics “deeplyfrustrated”. Cue another public
relations failure.
Most outside academia won’t care
about Social Science One, but it poses
a vital question for our 21st-century
world: who has the right to study
human society?
Throughout history, people-
watching was typically practised by
intellectuals, such as historians and
philosophers. Over time, governments
became involved, gathering data
about citizens to track, tax or control
them. In the late 20th century, private
sector companies got in on the act.
The big change in the 21st century is
the growing imbalance regarding who
controls these tools. Today, people’s
cyber-trails are one of the most
effective ways to track human society,
but that data resides primarily with
private tech companies, which
increasingly have better information
than national governments.
This was the key, even existential,
question behind Social Science One:
should academics be allowed to see
this information for research
purposes? Or should it stay hidden to
protect consumer privacy? Views
inside Silicon Valley are mixed.
Stanford University forced Sergey
Brin and Larry Page to publish their
foundational research on search
engines, because it was built on a
university website and considered a
public good. But once Google became
established, the data it collected
became proprietary — and secret.Twitter executives initially let
academics see its “hosepipe” of data
for research, since they considered
this to be a public good (although it
has now restricted this). Facebook,
meanwhile, has changed its policies.
Initially, it let some academics use its
data for research, which is how
Cambridge Analytica gained access.
When that furore erupted,
Facebook shut the data door. But
some staff felt they had a wider civic
duty to make the data available. So
they initiated Social Science One
hoping it would provide a way for
academics to use the data for research
but without creating privacy breaches.
Exactly why the initiative is
faltering is not clear. Some academics
say Facebook got cold feet. “It was just
PR for them,” one says. Some
Facebook officials argue that the real
problem was that some academics
were too disorganised to sort out the
legal issues associated with handling
private data.
“Making user data available for
research on a large scale in a way that
protects individual privacy is just
incredibly hard — maybe impossible,”
says one Facebook official.
Either way, I hope someone finds a
way to revitalise such experiments.
Otherwise, we face a world where tech
companies know more about the
human condition than anyone else —
with precious little oversight.[email protected]Why Facebook’s
data-sharing
initiative is
faltering
Notebook
by Gillian Tett
Words to reflect on this
Remembrance Sunday
Apropos of Lionel Barber’s article “The
point of departure” (November 2), I
recently happened upon a modest
memorial on a long stretch of beach at
Ouistreham in France, facing toward
England. The information on the
plaque reminded me that Ouistreham
was no ordinary beach and that history
had unfolded on that very spot.
And not merely history, but the
defeat of tyranny. A sand- and wind-
blasted quotation in French and
English, employing the rhetorical
energy of Henry V’s St Crispin’s Day
speech, was manifestly forward-
looking and filled with hope: “Men will
be proud to say, I am a European. We
hope to see a Europe where men of
every country will think as much of
being a European as belonging to their
native land. We hope that wherever
they go in the European continent,
they will truly feel here, I am at home.”
It was dated May 7 1948, four years
after more than 600 British troops fell
during the D-Day landing at nearby
Sword Beach, and was spoken by
Winston Churchill, seeking to
consolidate, not loosen, the creance
with postwar Europe.
During the many commemorations
of the centenary of the Great War,I
have watched aghast as the Brexit
plenipotentiaries in Brussels attempted
— and paraphrasing Mr Barber —
“splitting the Europeans and isolating
the Irish”. The shots at fission
backfired, although fission has
transmogrified Westminster.
Churchill, in the aforementioned
speech, endorsed a united continent
“whose physical strength will be such
that none will dare molest her tranquil
sway”. In a week marking
Remembrance Sunday and the 30th
anniversary of the fall of the Berlin
Wall, his warning should provide food
for thought for those who will gather at
the Cenotaph on Whitehall and who
beg to differ.
Tom Mooney
Screen, Co Wexford, IrelandNOVEMBER 9 2019 Section:Features Time: 11/20198/ - 18:41 User: nicola.davison Page Name:LEADER USA, Part,Page,Edition:USA , 8, 1