Facebook Fixes Beacon. Sort Of.
5 Comments Published by Rodney Rumford November 28th, 2007 in Facebook, Facebook News.
FACEBOOK FIX MAKES IT EASIER FOR USERS TO OPT OUT OF BEACON. There is nice detailed article from The San Jose Mercury News reporter Mark Boslet. Facebook fixes ad-sharing glitch.
We had a long discussion about the issues surrounding this hotbed of a topic and the potential implications on Tuesday.
Here is a short excerpt from the article:
“Facebook said Tuesday it made a technical change to its popular social-networking Web site to strengthen privacy protections for members.”
“But the alteration isn’t likely to satisfy privacy advocates who complain that an advertising program launched earlier this month invades the privacy of users by forcing them to opt out of a system that otherwise shares their purchase information with their friends.”
Moveon.org, Gartner, Facebook and FaceReviews.com weigh in for the article… Read the full San Jose Mercury News Facebook article here:
Comment that amused me: 
“The policy didn’t change,” said MoveOn.org spokesman Adam Green. “It’s like fixing a door on the Titanic.”
WOW! This is insinuating that facebook is doomed and going down. Fear mongering at its best from politically motivated Moveon.org.
Technorati Tags: facebook, Moveon, Facebook Beacon
The Titanic references Facebook’s opt-out policy, not Facebook itself.
MoveOn has said repeatedly that sites like Facebook are revolutionizing how we communicate and could transform how we organize around issues together in a 21st century democracy. The question is, will corporate advertisers get to write the rules? Or will these new social networks protect our basic rights—including privacy? We need to draw a line in the sand, making clear that the wish lists of corporate advertisers must not come before the basic privacy rights of Internet users.
Fixing a “technical glitch” in the implementation of a fundamentally flawed policy is indeed like fixing a door on the Titanic. Facebook should simply switch from an “opt out” to an “opt in” policy.
Adam,
I know that. But drawing that visualization; even to the perceived privacy policy issue is an interesting & overly dramatic statement.
Facebook does fundamentally change the way that I communicate. I love the way it reduces friction and lets a river of data flow to my selected friends based upon the privacy settings that I choose.
“The question is, will corporate advertisers get to write the rules? (another anti-business/corporate scare tactic) Or will these new social networks protect our basic rights—including privacy? We need to draw a line in the sand, making clear that the wish lists of corporate advertisers (you make it sound like they control everything) must not come before the basic privacy rights of Internet users.”
The basic privacy rights of the users are, and have always been intact with facebook users. It is called a privacy settings page. Learn it, know it, love it (or leave it).
Users agree to the terms of service when they join any website; these terms of service are almost always subject to change. I am sure this is no different than moveon.orgs terms and conditions. (I need to look more closely into your websites terms and conditions).
This has nothing to do with corporate advertisers writing the rules. This is a risk facebook is taking as a business. It happens everyday in the land of freedom and opportunity called America.
In fact; it looks to me like a political organization (yours) is sticking their nose in this and trying to write the rules.
Adam, we can respectfully agree to disagree that this is a fundamentally flawed policy. I do not think it is flawed. Nearly EVERY website online defaults you into the desired behavior.
So let’s assume they cave to your pressure… What’s next…? That you put pressure on them because you don’t agree on groups that they allow or don’t allow? Or that you find a particular application offensive or that it exposes too much information? It is a slippery slope my friend.
Political organizations should stay focused on political issues. (This is not one) If users do not like the privacy policy; it they can always leave facebook. (I suspect that less than 1/2 of 1% would leave. Facebook would make that number back in a week.) Users are very fickle and the free market dictates that they have choices of what websites they choose to use.
Cheers!
Rodney Rumford
It’s funny to hear Facebook say that their new ads are the most revolutionary development in media in 100 years from one side of their mouth and then defend their personal and identifiable data aggregation as ‘nothing new’ on the other side.
If Moveon should stay out of this issue, then maybe an application review site like this should do the same?
“Nearly EVERY website online defaults you into the desired behavior.”
That’s a crock.
The whole opt-in vs. opt-out battle was fought tooth-and-nail years ago, in the first dot-com era, the focus then being on email. Perhaps you’re too young to remember it, in which case I’d recommend reading up on the subject. As usual, Wikipedia can serve as a starting point for your research:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opt_in_e-mail
In the new reputation economy the Facebook community will decide if Facebook will remain a commodity of choice. As long as Facebook maintains transparency and keeps open lines of communication with the community regarding any questions or concerns ….well, social darwinism will take it’s course and Facebook will represent what is deemed by the community itself to be the greatest good for the greatest number of users. And the rest will go somewhere else or create the next new thing. Or something…