Facebook tries to make black look white
p2pnet news view Advertising | P2P:- Mark Zuckerberg, owner of social advertising company Fa$ebook, would rather you forget about Beacon, his blatant effort to spy on Fa$ebook users — without their knowledge or consent — as they surfed around the net.
The resulting data could then be used to more effectively target people for advertising campaigns.
Loud outcries of rage from users put a stop to that and Zuckerberg and his spinsters have been trying to pretend it never happened or, if it did, it was all in the best interests of users.
Now, “Two years after offending users with an advertising wheeze, Facebook has quietly announced that it was ready to settle a lawsuit about the scheme,” says The Guardian.
But what’s really going on? – it wonders.
Fa$ebook spokesman Barry Schnitt announced on Friday it’s, “come to an agreement over that lawsuit – with proposals that would see two things happen if a judge in San Jose approves the settlement,” the story says, continuing, those things being Beacon will close down entirely (it’s still running) and, “Facebook will put forward $9.5m to settle the case, with the money used to create a foundation ‘to benefit internet users’ – by which it means funding online privacy and security initiatives.”
And it’s being dressed up as a “net positive – Facebook had learned a lesson and internet users would get this great new foundation to make their online life better,” observes The Guardian, continuing »»»
Like many other companies, Facebook wants to be seen as a champion of people’s privacy online. However, unlike some competitors who pay lip service to the idea, I believe that Zuckerberg and friends genuinely value privacy, and for good reason: owning people’s identities online is the central plank of what makes the company different.
Most users register with their real names, meaning that Facebook has a lot more identifying information than other sites out there – and as long as you trust it, Facebook can use that “privacy” (its access to your private data) to its advantage.
Lose that trust, however, and millions of people could turn away from Facebook – even it does have 300 million people on board.
Beacon was the biggest mistake the company has made in its short life, though it has chipped away at other areas of what we consider public and private with things like the news feed and terms of service. But Facebook’s staff know that they have to be seen to be getting privacy right.
That concern with privacy is why it’s treading carefully with new projects in this area, and probably pretty happy to announce the news late on a Friday. And it’s why the company hired lobbyists in Washington and Brussels – including former Lib Dem MP Richard Allan.
“And it’s why Facebook is happy to pay $9.5m to make this thing go away,” The Guardian adds.
Key issues
Not at all incidentally, Canada’s privacy commissioner forced the advertising company to promise to make, significant technological changes to address the issue we felt was the biggest risk for users â the relatively free flow of personal information to more than one million application developers around the world, as assistant commissioner Elizabeth Denham summed it up.
It committed to a timetable for implementing the changes which are expected to be fully completed within a year, said the OPC.
Below is an overview of key issues raised during the investigation and Facebook`s response:
1. Third-party Application Developers
Issue: The sharing of personal information with third-party developers creating Facebook applications such as games and quizzes raises serious privacy risks. With more than one million developers around the globe, the Commissioner is concerned about a lack of adequate safeguards to effectively restrict those developers from accessing users` personal information, along with information about their online friends.
Response: Facebook has agreed to retrofit its application platform in a way that will prevent any application from accessing information until it obtains express consent for each category of personal information it wishes to access. Under this new permissions model, users adding an application will be advised that the application wants access to specific categories of information. The user will be able to control which categories of information an application is permitted to access. There will also be a link to a statement by the developer to explain how it will use the data.
This change will require significant technological changes. Developers using the platform will also need to adapt their applications and Facebook expects the entire process to take one year to implement.
2. Deactivation of Accounts
Issue: Facebook provides confusing information about the distinction between account deactivation whereby personal information is held in digital storage and deletion whereby personal information is actually erased from Facebook servers. As well, Facebook should implement a retention policy under which the personal information of users who have deactivated their accounts will be deleted from the site`s servers after a reasonable length of time.
Response: Facebook has agreed to make it clear to users that they have the option of either deactivating their account or deleting their account. This distinction will be explained in Facebook`s privacy policy and users will receive a notice about the delete option during the deactivation process.
While we asked for a retention policy, we looked at the issue again and considered what Facebook was proposing. We determined the company`s approach providing clarity about the options, offering a clear choice, and alleviating the confusion is acceptable because it will allow users to make informed decisions about how their personal information is to be handled.
3. Personal Information of Non-users
Issue: Facebook should better protect the privacy of non-users who are invited to join the site.
Response: Facebook agreed to include more information in its terms of use statement. Facebook confirmed that it does not use email addresses to track the success of its invitation feature, nor does it maintain a separate email address list for this purpose.
4. Accounts of Deceased Users
Issue: People should have a better way to provide meaningful consent to have their account memorialized after their death. As such, Facebook should be clear in its privacy policy that it will keep a user`s profile online after death so that friends can post comments and pay tribute.
Response: Facebook agreed to change the wording in its privacy policy to explain what will happen in the event of a user`s death.
Stay tuned.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win ~ Mahatma Gandhi
spy on Fa$ebook users – Angry Facebook users rebel at privacy invasion, November 2007
The Guardian – How Facebook tried to put a shine on $9.5m privacy suit, September 21, 2009
biggest risk for users – Facebook toes Canadian privacy line, August 27, 2009
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It`s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details.
