Enough "meaningless drivel". That's the message from a group of members of the UK government who have been examining how social media firms like LinkedIn gather and use social media data. The House of Commons Science and Technology Committee's report, released last week, has blamed firms for making people sign up to long incomprehensible legal contracts and calls for an international standard or kitemark   to identify sites that have clear terms and conditions. "The term and conditions statement that we all carelessly agree to is meaningless drivel to anyone," says Andrew Miller, the chair of the committee. Instead, he says, firms should provide a plain-English version of their terms. The simplified version would be checked by a third party and awarded a kitemark if it is an accurate reflection of the original. It is not yet clear who would administer the scheme, but the UK government is looking at introducing it on a voluntary basis. "we need to think through how we make that work in practice," says Miller. Would we pay any more attention to a kitemark? "I think if you went and did the survey, people would like to think they would," says Nigel Shadbolt at the University of Southampton, UK, who studies open data. "We do know people worry a lot about the inappropriate use of their information." But what would happen in practice is another matter, he says. Other organisations such as banks ask customers to sign long contracts they may not read or understand, but Miller believes social media requires special attention because it is so new. "We still don't know how significant the long-term impact is going to be of unwise things that kids put on social media that come back and bite them in 20 years' time," he says. Shadbolt, who gave evidence to the committee, says the problem is that we don't know how companies will use our data because their business models and uses of data are still evolving. Large collections of personal information have become valuable only recently, he says. The shock and anger when a social media firm does something with data that people don't expect, even if users have apparently permission, show that the current situation isn't working. If properly administered, a kitemark on terms and conditions could help people know what exactly they are signing up to. Although they would still have to actually read them. It can be inferred from the passage that Nigel Shadbolt doubts whether   _  .
social media firms would conduct a survey on the kitemark scheme people would pay as much attention to a kitemark as they think a kitemark scheme would be workable on a nationwide scale the kitemark would help companies develop their business models
Question: Enough "meaningless drivel". That's the message from a group of members of the UK government who have been examining how social media firms like LinkedIn gather and use social media data. The House of Commons Science and Technology Committee's report, released last week, has blamed firms for making people sign up to long incomprehensible legal contracts and calls for an international standard or kitemark   to identify sites that have clear terms and conditions. "The term and conditions statement that we all carelessly agree to is meaningless drivel to anyone," says Andrew Miller, the chair of the committee. Instead, he says, firms should provide a plain-English version of their terms. The simplified version would be checked by a third party and awarded a kitemark if it is an accurate reflection of the original. It is not yet clear who would administer the scheme, but the UK government is looking at introducing it on a voluntary basis. "we need to think through how we make that work in practice," says Miller. Would we pay any more attention to a kitemark? "I think if you went and did the survey, people would like to think they would," says Nigel Shadbolt at the University of Southampton, UK, who studies open data. "We do know people worry a lot about the inappropriate use of their information." But what would happen in practice is another matter, he says. Other organisations such as banks ask customers to sign long contracts they may not read or understand, but Miller believes social media requires special attention because it is so new. "We still don't know how significant the long-term impact is going to be of unwise things that kids put on social media that come back and bite them in 20 years' time," he says. Shadbolt, who gave evidence to the committee, says the problem is that we don't know how companies will use our data because their business models and uses of data are still evolving. Large collections of personal information have become valuable only recently, he says. The shock and anger when a social media firm does something with data that people don't expect, even if users have apparently permission, show that the current situation isn't working. If properly administered, a kitemark on terms and conditions could help people know what exactly they are signing up to. Although they would still have to actually read them. It can be inferred from the passage that Nigel Shadbolt doubts whether   _  .
A. social media firms would conduct a survey on the kitemark scheme
B. people would pay as much attention to a kitemark as they think
C. a kitemark scheme would be workable on a nationwide scale
D. the kitemark would help companies develop their business models
Answer: