So a woman interned at SLC Elections (which later became Cambridge Analytica) and now works at Uber.
After reading the story I fail to see her significance to the story of the Cambridge Analytica scandal.
The author of that piece is trying to make a fact that she's the daughter of Eric Schmidt into some sinister "Silicon Valley elite" impugning that she's the mastermind behind Cambridge Analytica becoming the shady organization.
It's really shady, grasping at rhetorical straws journalism.
"A firm that belonged to someone she knew about through her father" is so much juicier and scandalous than "Palantir".
Strangely, I don't know Eric Schmidt and I do know about Palantir.
Yes, Schmidt can buy more justice than most of us, but in this case, the primary issue is the high cost of justice, not that some people are rich and can afford it.
The idea that rich can bully anyone with lawyers is seductive, but this is The Guardian, a newspaper with its own army of lawyers. Newspaper that published Snowden files and many other controversial things.
If there was no merit to the complaint, the Guardian would tell Schmidt to sod off.
After reading the article it seems to me that the "journalist" threw a completely innocent person under the bus, tried to implicate her into an international scandal only because she happened to be a daughter of a famous person.
It's appalling what Guardian did implicating her in this scandal. And sad because it was otherwise well researched.