This latest theory purporting to explain Trump’s unlikely victory (we stop short of calling it a conspiracy theory, but it’s close to that) gives far too much credit to the sophisticated data-mavens who’ve supposedly mastered the science of finding and motivating voters. Surely the lesson of 2016 is precisely the opposite. It was Hillary Clinton’s campaign, not Trump’s, that employed the best and brightest data-engineers, the tech-savvy geniuses who understood voting patterns and demographic data. All they lacked was a likable candidate.

In any case, it’s a little hard to be outraged by the idea of a company improperly taking data from a social-media behemoth to which billions of user willing give their personal information. Facebook has always been—and always will be—an advertising platform. Users are Facebook’s products; advertisers are its consumers. If you hand over your personal data to an advertising company, you may expect it to be sold. On Wednesday Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg issued a long explanatory statement about the Cambridge Analytica controversy, but he might have just said that.