Comments on Facebook Privacy to RWW
January 12, 2010
You are absolutely right. If it was Social Media and Technology Theorist Book, then open would be fine. I believe the majority of people that use Facebook - at this point - are the same as AOL users from 1998. What Facebook has done borders on criminally negligent. If it’s all supposed to be open, then why not have everyone’s social security number out in the open?
Why is a specific promise of privacy on Facebook any different than the promise that my credit card information is protected at Amazon.com?
I just spent 20 minutes emailing an acquaintance of mine that is embroiled in a lawsuit to let him know that he and his wife have left the names and the ability to contact their friends and CHILDREN open to anyone that searches for them on the Internet, because their FB privacy settings are set incorrectly.
I have written jokingly many times in the past about Twittitlement - the idea that everyone is entitled to 24/7 access to robust communication technology for free. Call me old-fashioned and crazy, but I think it’s laughable that people have built their businesses around Twitter and Facebook.
I raise that point, however, from the consumer perspective. I accept complete responsibility for going along with “free” and building my network and re-connecting with people without paying Facebook one cent. I recognize that it gives me limited right to complain about the stupid notifications, cheesy ads or ridiculous ways they try to get you to use it more, such as notices like: “Cathleen, write on Stowe Boyd’s Wall.” I recognize the same about how I use Google services.
The thing is, I would gladly pay for Facebook, if given the opportunity, but I haven’t been. I think it has lost the one of the main advantages it had by breaking its privacy vows. If free means I have to spend hours educating relative strangers on how to protect their families from harassment or worse, than free is too f(*&ing expensive.
I would urge you and your contemporaries, those that agree and disagree, to stop thinking about this issue from the inside baseball - “data should be free and open” perspective - or the trade journalist - “Facebook has done a bad thing” perspective.
If GM promised to put a free tire in the trunk of every car, did that for 2 years and then announced that they had a cool new tire policy - from now on everyone’s free tires would have holes in them, unless they checked first - consumer reporters would go rightfully ballistic.
So look at it from a broad consumer perspective. Facebook clearly doesn’t care what “the trade” thinks because they know most consumers aren’t reading your stuff and wouldn’t understand it anyway. If you can’t get them to change their policy or to change their business model so consumers have a choice about paying for their privacy, then I ask you to consider the following.
As a member of the trade, help figure out what other services consumers should move to instead, so they can get what they believe they were promised from Facebook, and have the option to pay for such a service.
Recognize that what Facebook has done is unconscionable and consumers need to know it in plain language. This is a USA Today story not a TechCrunch or even a Wall Street Journal story. Help get it to the right people, so Facebook users - and users of other free media networks - understand what is happening, what they can do about it, how they can replace it and how much free really costs.
January 24, 2010
I believe both you and JustinKistner make valid points. To your point, Facebook created an unprecedented social communication network on the promise of privacy and free. People have found it useful, enjoyable and valuable and have come to depend on it in various ways. You are right to point out the “Let Them Eat Cake” mentality of tech executives, a mentality once attributed only to subprime mortgage lenders and Wall Street bankers. But at the same time, forgive me if I’m being repetitive, but similar to Justin, I find it hard to believe that any user thought there wouldn’t be a day when Facebook would turn around and say “time to pay.” None of us believed we’d have to pay with our privacy.
I still think industry insiders - tech bloggers, social media gurus, etc. - miss a larger point. Most of the people I know on Facebook are not tech savvy and are not policy experts. The New York Times article by Sarah Perez from 1/20 on how to manage privacy settings is great, (btw, I could not figure out how to share it on FB so I came here to find it and found this instead) but until you stop hand-wringing and tell people how to fight back rather, than how to adapt, you’re not helping that much.
I’m not powerful enough or based in the industry enough, but the people I know see me as a tech expert. So on their behalf and mine, I’d like to see some guidance about what people like me can do to force change or find an alternative.
Here are some ideas: -I tweeted to @Jason that he should boycott Facebook instead of Comscore. —I am happy to pay Mark Schmuckerberg a small fee every month for the use of his service. Please let him know that and have him tell me where to sign up. - Alternatives: Would you recommend people bring their networks to NING? What are other options? Are there any moribund social networks that would welcome a mass shift to their site? -What about MySpace? If Rupert Murdoch is all about paying, why can’t he slap a new brand on MySpace and make it private? Will he listen to you guys rather than me?
Unlike the guy that said “Keep the government out of my Medicare,” I’m not naive enough to believe that I can keep NBC out of my late night TV or to continue to receive services from businesses like Facebook for “free”.
But as I said in my comments in your 1/12/10 post:
“Recognize that what Facebook has done is unconscionable and consumers need to know it in plain language. This is a USA Today story not a TechCrunch or even a Wall Street Journal story. Help get it to the right people, so Facebook users - and users of other free media networks - understand what is happening, what they can do about it, how they can replace it and how much free really costs.”
2 weeks ago • 1 note
