Facebook yesterday unveiled an alteration to its privacy settings. And if you're a user, you'd better pay attention, or these new "privacy" settings can cause you to share far more than you previously were. In fact, this purported attempt to give users control over their privacy looks like just the opposite.
There are two key changes at play here. First, Facebook is rolling out the option to adjust privacy settings on a per-post basis. That means if you have a status update or photo, for example, which you only want to share with a certain group of friends or co-workers, you will be able to do that. That's a good thing. That's something we should have had from the very beginning.
But, as usual, what Facebook is hyping as its attempt to give users more privacy appears to be a thinly veiled plan for getting them to share themselves with more of the Web than ever and, in turn, for their data to be searchable and part of the real-time Web.
This is clear based on what Facebook "recommends" users' new privacy settings should be. In a video explaining the changes, a Facebook spokeswoman says:
For information like About Me, Family and Relationships, Work and Education Info, and the default for posts you create such as photos, videos, and notes, we recommend the 'Everyone' privacy setting. That information helps make it easier for people to find and learn about you. It's important to know that everyone means everyone on the Internet.
Wow. So the ever-trustworthy Facebook is now recommending that people share everything -- photos? videos? -- with the entire Internet. That doesn't quite scream out "more privacy" to me.
To make this far worse, Facebook went ahead and switched most of its users' default settings to "Everyone," so that if they didn't take the initiative to look into these new settings themselves, everything they would do or upload from that point on would be made publicly available to the greater Internet, despite whatever privacy settings the user set for him or herself originally. Rather than letting users decide whether to make the insane decision to share all their information with the entire Internet, Facebook made that choice for them. Absolutely egregious.
This caused a backlash from users, who responded vehemently to the changes outlined on Facebook's blog. Organizations like the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) shamed Facebook for its seemingly sneaky tactic as well. When I was prompted to change my privacy settings, the default remained on "Old Settings." But this is only because I've manually changed my privacy settings before, which most Facebook users haven't.
Similarly, whereas the default for posting a status update for most users is now on "Everyone," since I've adjusted my settings before, mine remains on "Only Friends."
I'm curious to see how Facebook responds to the user backlash. The company habitually makes changes to its policies and quietly pulls back once users revolt. It's as if Facebook wants to see how much it can get away with. (Think: Beacon, Terms of Service...) In the meantime, I would urge all Facebook users to pay attention and make sure their privacy settings are still intact as soon as this screen pops up:
This issue is yet another reminder that, despite what it says, for Facebook, user privacy is not a priority.
Lets face it. Who really cares about the privacy settings? Basically, people whose professional activity somehow concern the IT field. Most of the young users not only notice the "sneaky Facebook fiddles", they still upload crazy photos and have an access for everyone.That's why, IMHO, Facebook keeps continue to create its own meaning of privacy:))) i.e. dear users, please, share everything with everyone, who cares about such stupid things, don't be a paranoiac, people want to know about you:)
Hi Chayes, I totally agree. Even if, like Paul says, there's no totally "private" space on the Internet, Facebook (as an app) really does give you control over who sees your profile information. I'm fine with my friends knowing what my home phone number is. I don't think I'd be happy if some stalker finds it through Google search. Maybe I'm lucky because I understand privacy settings, but a lot of other users would be deceived by Facebook's move.
Good post, Nicole. Once again, it seems to me that Facebook is only trying to manipulate users to do and change what will serve Facebook more than the users. I saw the new privacy settings announcement as a new Facebook suggestion and clicked on "No, thank you."
I see your point, however what bothers me about Facebook is that they had changed your settings so everyone could see the information. Yes, the user had a choice to keep their old settings, but, how many people didn't bother to even look at it and clicked accept out of habit? It was a back-handed way of doing business. People who use Twitter should understand how the site works, I have a Twitter account that I use infrequently and I am often amazed by the people that follow me. Twitter has evolved into a narcissists' dream.
If Facebook is trying to use their data to put themselves in an advantageous postion, they have every right to try to gain a profit throught their business. They shouldn't do so through deceit and trickery.
I can understand your concerns particularly with regards to users been able to exercise control over the information they put on these social networks. I'm not really into facebook and so I'n not that knowledgeable with all these continual change in privacy settings by facebook.
But one thing we should know is that these social networks are in a very stiff competitive and with real-time search now the horizon, they are all now scrambling to organize the data for search optimization. Here is how someone decribed the latest Facebook effort:
"I understand why Facebook is attempting to expand the permissions it collects from users to share their information. The more information is open, the more interesting Facebook is to people trying to get in to the system or to expand their own networks. And the more people use Facebook to define their social circles, the more potentially monetizable data Facebook has, and the more valuable and competitive its database is, compared to other social systems.
Moreover, the more public Facebook users' updates are, the better Facebook can fend off Twitter, which has a social system that is by default open. On Twitter, unless users specify otherwise, anyone can follow them, and all updates are public. Facebook's social graph has been historically closed: Friending has to be mutual, and updates, so far, have been limited to just friends.
With the new defaults, Facebook becomes more searchable, more Twitter-like, and gets more traffic from search engines".
But in truth, if i where i one of these cosial networks, i would definitely take heed of what Google's CEO just said.
Paul - Which is why I only post things I wouldn't be embarassed if my mother read or saw. However, there are people who have no filter. Sometimes you have to try to protect people from their own ignorance. That being said, if someone wants to post information about illegal activities, they shouldn't expect the right to privacy. However, if someone gets your phone number etc because Facebook changed everyones account settings, than that is wrong. Yes, the Internet is a public domain, but if I use a site that I need a user name and password to enter, then I should expect some sort of control over my privacy.
Protect your privacy online? Why do you folks fall for these Facebook gimmicks? How many times do folks wanted to be told that there is no privacy online? Here is what Google's CEO said about online privacy:
"
If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place.
He expands on his answer, adding that the your information could be made available not only to curious searchers or prying friends, but also to the authorities, and that there's little recourse for people worried about unintentionally "oversharing" online:
But if you really need that kind of privacy, the reality is that search engines, including Google, do retain this information for some time. And [...] we're all subject, in the US, to the Patriot Act, and it is possible that that information could be made available to the authorities".
So the next time Facebook put out a new press release about protecting your online privacy, you better treat it as a publicity stunt. You should always be aware that what you put online is for public foray which inevitably may come to hurt you in the future. This is the inconvenient truth folks!!1
moop - If Facebook didn't keep trying to get away with these questionable practices, then there wouldn't be a reason to post articles like this. If everyone stays quiet, then Facebook would just keep on compromising users privacy. It's a good thing many of us are not complacent enough to blindly accept any changes that are forced upon us.
I can't think why anyone wouldn't welcome news about how to protect their privacy online. Then again, lots of folk don't seem to care; and that is a huge problem.
The ThinkerNet does not reflect the views of TechWeb. The ThinkerNet is an informal means of communication to members and visitors of the Internet Evolution site. Individual authors are chosen by Internet Evolution to blog. Neither Internet Evolution nor TechWeb assume responsibility for comments, claims, or opinions made by authors and ThinkerNet bloggers. They are no substitute for your own research and should not be relied upon for trading or any other purpose.
We're live on IE Radio with Naomi Baron, author of Always On: Language in an Online and Mobile World, and professor of linguistics and language at American University.
Hey, IE Radio fans! We hope you're ready for another exciting interview. Today we're welcoming Naomi Baron, author of Always On: Language in an Online and Mobile World, and professor of linguistics and language at American University. Baron is joining us at 2:00 p.m. ET.
The Internet is making us stupid. No wait, the Internet is making us smart. Multi-tasking helps us consume more information... orrrr it reduces the amount of knowledge we can retain.
The Web has become the preferred spot for documenting personal flaws. With every online confession, Web users are crafting their detailed autobiographies and setting them free for the public's consuming pleasure.
Earlier this week, Facebook made a big fuss over the fact that it has allegedly registered its 500 millionth user. In an effort to celebrate, we here at Internet Evolution called for your Facebook Horror Stories. Hoo boy, was this going to be fun!
Getting to Work on Smart Work: How IT Is Transforming the Implementation of the 'Internet of Things' Organizations in all industry sectors are becoming more instrumented, interconnected, and intelligent -- and that's changing the way they approach virtually every facet of their operations. It's up to IT to help organizations adopt a "Three I's" approach that leverages the emerging Internet of Things and enables them to work smarter. READ THIS eBOOK
your weekly update of news, analysis, and
opinion from Internet Evolution - FREE! REGISTER HERE
Wanted! Site Moderators Internet Evolution is looking for a handful of readers to help moderate the message boards on our site – as well as engaging in high-IQ conversation with the industry mavens on our thinkerNet blogosphere. The job comes with various perks, bags of kudos, and GIANT bragging rights. Interested?
To save this item to your list of favorite Internet Evolution content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
More companies are trolling social networks to find and vet potential job candidates. Beware the pitfalls of blurring the line between personal and professional lives.
We do love our social networking, but, according to computer scientist Jaron Lanier, we may be diminishing ourselves when we join the hive. “May be? Ha!” says Mr. Cramer.
As enterprises leap into the Web 2.0 world of blogging, commenting, and social networking, just 'being there' won't deliver ROI. You may want a 'Web Evangelist' to systematically harvest the feedback in order to polish your product or service.
What can users today do to protect their online privacy? The simplest and most obvious option is to not use the Internet – at all. However, once all digital information is consolidated over the Internet, trying to protect digital identity by simply unplugging from the Internet becomes impossible – a fact that has manifest implications for civil liberties, Saunders says.
By 2011 the number of Internet-connected sensors will exceed 1 trillion, making your chances of doing anything or going anywhere unnoticed pretty much zero. Saunders talks about how the 'sensortization' of the Internet is eliminating the traditional divide between online and offline populations.
The 20th Century Internet was characterized by the ability to interact with other people and information on the Internet largely without anyone knowing who you were. The Internet of this century, conversely, will be defined by identity. Saunders explains how Internet users are unwittingly contributing to the demise of the anonymous Internet.
Steve Saunders talks about the risks inherent in uncontrolled, widespread profiling of Internet users, and how one day this practice could form the basis of a new industry, the Outernet, which in economic terms will have outgrown the commercial value of the Internet itself.
Search companies and social networks are collecting incredibly detailed information about their users, says Steve Saunders, who predicts that these 'profiles' could one day become commodities to be bought and sold by companies on 'profile markets' or 'identity exchanges’ – the digital DNA equivalents of the financial and commodities exchanges on which stocks, oil, and gold are traded.
There's a public-policy war on copyright that nobody is winning, and inconsistencies in viewpoint and interpretation seem to be multiplying. We need to step back and think our policies over again, or we risk having a strategy that fails everyone.
Ultraviolet is an industry-wide attempt to standardize video content delivery across multiple platforms. Apart from the fact that it’s based in the cloud, relies on the DRM system, and isn’t backed by Apple… it sounds great!
The FCC's Sixth Broadband Report has a hidden secret. But here’s a hint: The regulatory body plans to regulate broadband as a telecommunications service.
Once defined by epic journeys, planning, and maps, the phrase "on the road" takes on new meaning in a digital age, where we can make all our decisions using our connected devices en route.
Digg
Del.icio.us
Reddit
Email This
TWEET THIS
