Not sure it's so different. Here's from an Obama's campaign digital head:
> Facebook was surprised we were able to suck out the whole social graph, but they didn’t stop us once they realized that was what we were doing.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevleetaru/2018/03/19/why-are...
Whereas team Obama didn't just get friends of friends, they got everyone regardless of their privacy settings or apps in use?
edit: adding original source for the quote instead of forbes:
Re:SCL – A Very British Coup
by thousandautumns on Thursday March 22, 2018 @11:48AM
(#16649626)
3 actually applies to the Obama campaign, though without the "false pretenses" part. The majority of people they harvested data on was via friends giving consent. But the other points remain important differences.
The Obama campaign didn’t deceive users of its app, and it didn’t violate FB’s then policies, but it apparently did harvest friend-of-user data just as keenly as CA: https://twitter.com/jaypinho/status/975077567551197184
2) CA overstepped their agreement with Facebook, agreed to delete their data, and didn't
3) The CA process specifically harvested data from friends of people who'd signed up, including under false pretences.
4) The Channel 4 interview talking about bribes and entrapment: https://www.channel4.com/news/cambridge-analytica-revealed-t...
Edit: 5) It doesn't seem like anyone on the right claimed the Obama campaign was unethical in this way at the time?