According to @FakeAPStylebook, a humorous Twitter style guide for web writing, “it is no longer necessary to write new stories about Facebook privacy issues; just change the dates.”
It is almost true, as Facebook has been in the news many, many times over the last year for making changes that affect users’ privacy, without properly notifying or informing users about the change or making it easy for them to opt-in or opt-out of the changes.
In each case, it seems that Facebook apologizes for the changes (but rarely reverts them, or makes other compromises) and then promises to change its procedures for future releases. But as FakeAPStylebook points out, you can almost take the exact same story from months ago, reprint it with new dates, and have it be pretty accurate. It seems that Facebook is a slow learner.
The Facebook Issue
This is a big issue because Facebook is making fundamental changes to people’s default privacy settings and has done little to inform users of the impacts from the changes.
Now Facebook’s privacy policy has turned into a 5800+ word document, with a corresponding FAQ document that is 45,000+ words long. By comparison the United States Constitution is only 4,543 words long and this article is a measly 1500 words.
In fact, according to the New York Times, “To opt out of full disclosure of most information, it is necessary to click through more than 50 privacy buttons, which then require choosing among a total of more than 170 options.”
But that only opts out of most sharing. Some items can either be shared with everyone as entirely and openly public, or not shared at all. This includes your interests, groups, and other information about your personal preferences.
In response to criticism, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg responded by saying “If you’re not comfortable sharing, don’t.”
Are there only two options to sharing on the Internet: share with everyone, or don’t share at all? It is good advice that one should expect something that is posted on the Internet to become public, even if it is posted to private circles. However, that logic certainly does not exclude social sharing sites from protecting its users’ privacy settings.
The main issue with Facebook’s privacy changes is that only a small percentage of users are even aware of the extent of the changes, and were enrolled in the changes with only a small non-descript screen giving them the chance to opt-out.
Why Privacy Matters
Fundamentally, it is not an issue that Facebook – or any other site – shares its users’ data or makes information public. The issue is that content that once was private is now being made public without the user’s knowledge.
For example, one of Facebook’s options allows external sites to use your personal information, including your “likes” and interests, as well as the same information about your friends, in order to “personalize your experience” on that site. That is fine, and could be really interesting, except for two issues.
First, users are automatically enrolled and must opt out. Second, when a user does opt out, they are given this message: “Please keep in mind that if you opt out, your friends may still share public Facebook information about you to personalize their experience on these partner sites unless you block the application.” This means that even if you want your information to be private, your friends will still automatically share that information for you.
In order to prevent that, you have to specifically identify and block each site individually (or remove all your friends.) After a lengthy, but detailed, explanation in the help section on Facebook, the guide only lists a few example sites and applications that can gather your data through your friends. It does not appear that there is any comprehensive list, and no way to identify which applications may be accessing data that otherwise would only be available to friends.
Circles of Privacy: Understanding Social Media’s Role
In privacy ethics, especially as it relates to media and reporting, there is a concept called circles of privacy. This states that individuals have different levels of privacy, and each level requires additional justification before being made public.
In a practical sense, people are very selective with the information that we choose to disclose to each circle. Information shared between close friends is shared with a common trust that the information will generally remain private. As a result, the information tends to be more personal and intimate. As each circle grows in its size and informality, information is censored so that personal and private information is removed.
The benefit of social media is that we choose who our “public” is. We friend, unfriend, and have tight control over which specific individuals have access to our information and updates. This is one of the reasons that social media has grown so quickly: we generally control who sees our information, and we speak and share accordingly.
If we want everything to be public, we tend to moderate our discussions and disclosures accordingly. Conversely, if we anticipate that the information will go to a select few people, then we are more willing to be personal in the types of information that we provide.
Information does not even need to be deeply personal for us to want to keep it private. Vacation pictures, weekend plans, political views, and opinions on the book you just read, or any number of different things that are commonly discussed among friends, are not necessarily things that we want everyone to see or know.
For example, there is a difference between what people share on a Linked-in account and a Facebook account (or even on Twitter). Why? Because people assume different circles of privacy. Facebook may be for more personal friends and will revolve more around your personal life. Linked-in generally involves business associates, and information posted there will revolve around your business career.
Twitter, even though it may be private, is generally understood as an open public platform, with the anticipation that anyone can see what you write. As a result, you may or may not choose to share personal information, but you do so with the knowledge that information you share is public.
While we all realize that individual people can share secrets that were meant to be secret (even against our wishes), we do not expect for businesses to suddenly decide that our personal information can now be public. Even if the information that is not inherently personal, such as our general interests and hobbies, it should not be made public without permission and/or clear disclosure if it was originally gathered under the guise of user-controlled privacy.
Facebook’s trouble is that is has employed a classic bait-and-switch maneuver. It enticed users with the ability to make private circles, share personal experiences, and then suddenly made much of that information public by default.
Why Does a Software Development Company Care?
One of our biggest mottos is to “create a ‘win’ in whatever we do.” We’ve previously written what a win means to us, but to sum it up: a win for us means that for us to benefit, our client must benefit, and our client’s customers must benefit, and the community must benefit.
Among the many types of custom software systems that we create, we develop Facebook applications, as well as other websites and mobile apps that integrate with Facebook, some of which gather information about users. Of course, any information gathered very strictly complies with Facebook’s policies (which also recently allow more information to be disclosed and shared). This information is generally used for marketing and advertising in order to produce more targeted ads and promotions, which in turn benefits whatever business is building the app for Facebook, and helps justify the investment and creation of the application.
This cycle – content creation, information gathering, and marketing – is what ultimately drives everything from TV content to Internet applications, and is an important financial incentive towards creating good content.
The reason we care as a custom software company is that in order for us to “win” our clients and client’s customers should benefit. This presents a possible predicament for us when we know that Facebook gives businesses the right to access certain information; however individuals may not be aware that information is now public.
Our hope is that Facebook and other social media sites will do more to inform and educate users about their privacy options, and to make better “meta” options for controlling privacy settings. Meta options act as a circuit breaker to privacy settings, allowing you to turn them on or off with only a few clicks. Detailed and specific settings may still be available to fine tune settings for people who understand the implications of each option, but for children and less tech savvy people, simple meta controls are more practical and protective.
This means that users are really in control and aware of what information is being made available and they can make an informed choice about what information they choose to share.
Data collection and sharing is not unique to Facebook or social media. We have built many database and data collection systems that help manage and present meaningful information from vast amounts of data. However, as we build these systems for clients, we also help build policies and safeguards which protect that data, and protect those from whom the data is gathered.
