Another analogy.
Assuming I order a product from Amazon. The product is shipped via dhl, received at the port of entry, processed and I pay 3 persons in this transaction, Amazon for the product, GoK as duty on the product ( because I am the importer) and I pay DHL as the transporter.
The issue with social media is defining the product and defining the importer. Let's call social medias product ' product x'. I pay for product x with my data. Without agreeing to have my data collected, I cannot access social media.
In defining the importer, let's ask simple questions.
Does FB appear the same to all nationalities? Does FB to the Russian, British and Indian bear the same language, thought process and cultural sensitivities? Does FB hire personnel with a mind to target certain regions of the world, to adapt it's offering to the peculiarities of that region? If indeed the answer is Yes, can you then claim that all individuals who log in to FB are teleported to purchase the product x from one server in the US. What kind of product x is this that is based in one place yet caters to different cultures and is simultaneously in different languages?
I put it to you that FB is the importer of product x into various economies. FB can decide to not have product x available in a certain jurisdiction. So in the case of FB, FB has made ( by default) their product available to me in Kenya. The ISP is the transporter and I purchase from FB with my personal data. As such, FB should pay duty to the government.
They must find it difficult....... those who have taken authority as the truth, rather than truth as the authority. -G. Massey.