Facebook’s Great Betrayal
Facebook’s privacy pullback isn’t just outrageous; it’s a landmark turning point for the social network. Facebook has blundered before, but the latest changes are far more calculated. The company has, in short, turned evil.
Its new privacy policy have turned the social network inside out: millions of people have signed up because Facebook offers a sense of safety. For the last five years — as long as you’re relatively careful about who you accept as your friends — what you do and say on Facebook for the most part stays on Facebook. Katie Couric’s daughter first posted pictures of her famous mom dancing silly in 2006, but it took three years for them to leak to us. (Thank you tipsters!) But virtually overnight and without a clear warning, Facebook has completely reversed those user expectations. Their new privacy settings amount to making anything you post on Facebook to be public, unless you go to great lengths to keep your info private.
The most insidious part of Facebook’s scheme to expose user data has been how the company framed them, claiming to want to enhance privacy. In an open letter to his 350 million+ users, CEO Mark Zuckerberg claimed he believed the old privacy framework was “no longer the best way for you to control your privacy,” and that the new system would give people “even more control of their information.” It would be “simpler” and finer-grained.
But when the system came out a week later, it actually gave less, not more, control over information. Gone was the ability to hide your friends list, profile pictures, fan pages and network membership from all strangers; Facebook’s new, formal privacy policy explicitly made this information public (despite the ability to keep some of it, like the friends list, off your profile page).
Meanwhile, the social network is pushing users hard to share their personal content with strangers. Users are being forced to update their privacy settings, with most default choices set to “Everyone” in the world or “friends of friends.”
Facebook’s business rationale here is clear. Rival Silicon Valley startup Twitter has grown extremely quickly in the last few years, almost entirely on the back of public content — from celebrities, people’s friends and users’ professional colleagues. That has brought traffic, money from search engines and a $1 billion valuation.
Facebook wants in on that kind of growth, and more public content means more traffic. But Facebook has historically been one of the most private of the social networks, functioning as a sort of safe alcove amid the chaos of MySpace and Friendster. “Privacy is a big reason Facebook users are so loyal,” BusinessWeek‘s Sarah Lacy wrote in 2006 (via Big Money).
So Facebook needed to give users a big shove to put its business plan into play. As startup founder Jason Calacanis puts it,
Facebook is trying to dupe hundreds of millions of users they’ve spent years attracting into exposing their data for Facebook’s personal gain: pageviews. Yes, Facebook is tricking us into exposing all our items so that those personal items get indexed in search engines–including Facebook’s–in order to drive more traffic to Facebook.
But it’s not just that Facebook is tricking its users; it’s betraying them. It did so when it literally communalized private friend lists that people spent years accumulating, without which their accounts would be useless. It did so when it mislead them by saying it wanted to enhance their privacy, when the real goal was growth and profit. And it continues to do so every day it does not respond to the loud fedback of its users (and the implicit feedback of its own CEO).
And people increasingly know they’ve been betrayed. This past weekend, journalist Dan Gillmor publicly deleted his Facebook account. Heidi Moore at Slate’s Big Money temporarily deactivated her account as a “conscientious objection.” And look at the big-name tech journalists weighing in on all the shock and outrage on Facebook critic Calacanis’ “Wall” (click to enlarge):
Facebook has been through embarrassing privacy snafus before, like the intrusive “Beacon” advertising system, which the company eventually abandoned. But this one was so pre-meditated, so pre-processed and so condescendingly hyped and spun in advance. It’s obvious that Facebook is making a calculation, one that, for users, involved a lot more subtraction than addition. Barring mass defections, the difference will drop straight to Facebook’s bottom line.
(Top pic: Zuckerberg, by Josh Lowensohn)
Send an email to Ryan Tate, the author of this post, at elna@tnjxre.pbzryan@gawker.com
moc.rekwag@nayr.
Read it folks. “Facebook has blundered before, but the latest changes are far more calculated. The company has, in short, turned evil.”
Truly, it is time to leave.
What people are forgetting is while the privacy settings have been changed, they give you this great big pop up saying that the privacy settings have been changed and give you the opportunity to change it back. So go change them back. Then you account stays just as private.
Take a deeper look. Especially from the “Consent” point of view. Did you
give consent to these changes? Of course not.
Also, if you participate in many of the apps and quizzes available on
Facebook, you should probably know what they expose. To take a look at this
info, I suggest you take the ACLU quiz. They *show* you what facebook
exposes not only about you, but your friends. It's pretty interesting (and
shocking).
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=126272...
Finally, the percentage of Facebook users who go in and fully privatize
their Facebook settings is rather low (only 15-20% -
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091209/ap_on_hi_te...)
The long and short here? Facebook just doesn't care about user privacy, do
you?
Anyone who has used the internet for any expanse of time should know that NOTHING is private. Whether you go full private on facebook or not is up to you. If you are private, it doesn't stop your best buddy getting mad at you and posting stupid pictures of you elsewhere.
I don't participate in those stupid apps and quizes just because they are stupid time wasters.
When I signed up for facebook I consented to their hosting the content I put on there in any way they see fit; that's what creating an account anywhere does. Even FetLife isn't immune. John Baku himself shares links to people's pictures through his twitter account even if you have to log in to get to them. That is a violation of privacy as well but I don't see anyone jumping down his throat.
The only person who should care about user privacy is the person who created the account. A website should give the user the ability to make their information private; which it does, but it doesn't mean that it automatically makes it private and gives you the option to open it up.
True.
Now, I'm not naive in the ways of Internet Privacy (in fact I've taught many
classes on the subject). You are correct, the assumption of Privacy on the
Internet should be tempered and caution must be taken. However, simply
“rolling over and taking it” is not the way to go either.
There is a HUGE difference between what mr John Baku does and what Facebook
is doing. And true, you may not be taking the quizzes on Facebook, but were
you aware that if your “friends” take them it exposes your info to marketers
and app makers regardless of your privacy settings (this includes some
spiders and search engines). So, info you may not want to be exposed can be
exposed by Facebook through the applications it allows and promotes. They do
this with full knowledge and are completely aware that their privacy
settings don't count for a thing.
Again, take the ACLU quiz. It will show you *exactly* what I'm talking
about.
Now, I simply streamed info into Facebook from other Sites, so nothing in
there was private. My real name was never used. I could care less what
happened to the info. But I did not like the fact that *if* I wanted to link
to writing and photos they tried to lay claim that data as their own and
would never truly deactivate my account (that account will always lurk).
Not unusual, but just another nail in Facebook's coffin.
Lastly, this last privacy strong-arm tactic has been noticed by Congress. I
would rather we, as users, regulate these Sites through our own actions than
have some clueless lawmaker create legislation that not only effects
Facebook, but Sites like FetLife.
Would you want that? I sure as hell don't…but I think it's coming.
Do I sound like a doomsayer?
Just because you and I know how to “use” these Sites doesn't mean we should
be educating others about the dangers and letting them decide for
themselves. Use it or not, but Caveat emptor!
What people are forgetting is while the privacy settings have been changed, they give you this great big pop up saying that the privacy settings have been changed and give you the opportunity to change it back. So go change them back. Then you account stays just as private.
Take a deeper look. Especially from the “Consent” point of view. Did you
give consent to these changes? Of course not.
Also, if you participate in many of the apps and quizzes available on
Facebook, you should probably know what they expose. To take a look at this
info, I suggest you take the ACLU quiz. They *show* you what facebook
exposes not only about you, but your friends. It's pretty interesting (and
shocking).
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=126272...
Finally, the percentage of Facebook users who go in and fully privatize
their Facebook settings is rather low (only 15-20% -
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091209/ap_on_hi_te...)
The long and short here? Facebook just doesn't care about user privacy, do
you?
Anyone who has used the internet for any expanse of time should know that NOTHING is private. Whether you go full private on facebook or not is up to you. If you are private, it doesn't stop your best buddy getting mad at you and posting stupid pictures of you elsewhere.
I don't participate in those stupid apps and quizes just because they are stupid time wasters.
When I signed up for facebook I consented to their hosting the content I put on there in any way they see fit; that's what creating an account anywhere does. Even FetLife isn't immune. John Baku himself shares links to people's pictures through his twitter account even if you have to log in to get to them. That is a violation of privacy as well but I don't see anyone jumping down his throat.
The only person who should care about user privacy is the person who created the account. A website should give the user the ability to make their information private; which it does, but it doesn't mean that it automatically makes it private and gives you the option to open it up.
True.
Now, I'm not naive in the ways of Internet Privacy (in fact I've taught many
classes on the subject). You are correct, the assumption of Privacy on the
Internet should be tempered and caution must be taken. However, simply
“rolling over and taking it” is not the way to go either.
There is a HUGE difference between what mr John Baku does and what Facebook
is doing. And true, you may not be taking the quizzes on Facebook, but were
you aware that if your “friends” take them it exposes your info to marketers
and app makers regardless of your privacy settings (this includes some
spiders and search engines). So, info you may not want to be exposed can be
exposed by Facebook through the applications it allows and promotes. They do
this with full knowledge and are completely aware that their privacy
settings don't count for a thing.
Again, take the ACLU quiz. It will show you *exactly* what I'm talking
about.
Now, I simply streamed info into Facebook from other Sites, so nothing in
there was private. My real name was never used. I could care less what
happened to the info. But I did not like the fact that *if* I wanted to link
to writing and photos they tried to lay claim that data as their own and
would never truly deactivate my account (that account will always lurk).
Not unusual, but just another nail in Facebook's coffin.
Lastly, this last privacy strong-arm tactic has been noticed by Congress. I
would rather we, as users, regulate these Sites through our own actions than
have some clueless lawmaker create legislation that not only effects
Facebook, but Sites like FetLife.
Would you want that? I sure as hell don't…but I think it's coming.
Do I sound like a doomsayer?
Just because you and I know how to “use” these Sites doesn't mean we should
be educating others about the dangers and letting them decide for
themselves. Use it or not, but Caveat emptor!