see more: pay per click

http://www.freeonlinemakemoney.com

http://pixelvoiceblog.blogspot.com/2009/02/bold-social-networking-trends-for-2009.html

http://www.justaskgemalto.com

http://www.notronwest.com/blog/2009/02/02/your-facebook-data-is-for-sale-and-it-always-has-been/

Really, what's wrong with that? Ads are ads. Accept them.

What I don't like though is when my "interaction" with these ads are broadcasted to all my friends via the news feed. That wouldn't go down well with most people.

I guess the reality is those sites aren't really that different after all. At least myspace is up front about things they are doing.

I just want to say "lol", if you want to be anonymous don't trust such companies, adopt free open source solution to communicate. Else, don't come moaning if your privacy has been violated. Did any of you (facebook users) actually read the Terms and all these legacies ?

Facebook (and even myspace, it's all the same) are the best way for you to mix private life to public life, and then enable a lot of people to access to your privacy.

Number 42: +1;

However it's just for money, this story's nothing dangerous. Just remember that widgets may be similar to worms, and I bet you've been infected (it's a kind of recursive worm) months ago, so all your data has been sent to some servers and can be sold. Sold to your firm or futur firm. Sold to some pirates who are looking for some SE possibilities or the answer to your so sophisticated secret question.

It isn't about Facebook, it's you !

For the one interested in privacy: Unix-like system + silc communication + phpBlogs on a server you rent. GnuPG is a very good idea too. Sure you will still be able to use your favorite programs, but having an alternative when transmitting private information is still a good thing.

The reverse is also true: if, for example, it's an ad for a clearance sale on knitting yarn, I really DO want to see that ad.

And, I don't want to pay a subscription fee to use Facebook, so I'd rather advertisers pay for the service for me. As a business owner, I can tax-deduct direct advertising costs, but not social network subscription fees.

Seems to me, a compromise solution would be a check-box below each Facebook ad, saying "I'm not interested in this product/service." Click the box, and you don't see that ad again, ever.

Just my 2 cents worth!

Ever noticed while checking the latest on the live feed that the ads on the side bar strangely enough always feature your favorite artists, daring you to "test your knowledge" on the given subject?

It's USER-SPECIFIC ADVERTISING.

If I'm not mistaken, most internet advertising companies have caught onto this including GOOGLE ADS.

When a company has tens of millions of users, it will focus on generating revenue as a primary concern. My bet, Facebook will eventually yield to corporate primal instincts and serve greed over community.

Another big issue is the company can't services individual requests.

Here are several examples:
- people have their accounts deleted with no recourse
- people are denied using Facebook advertising with no explanation

Facebook needs to address these issues as well.

Eventually, the community will turn on them. I, for one, look forward to having balance in the relationship.

We received an e-mail from Facebook (mentioned at the end of the story) and will be analyzing this later today.

@Engago Team – yeah, they do need to make money. I think a lot of social sites are struggling trying to find the balance, so at least they’re not alone.

@Kat – Have to agree I would not like to be targeted based on my sexual orientation.

@Kate – I have to admit, there seems to be some confusion about where to draw the line when it comes to [any] social sites and marketing – it’s a double edged sword – they want to offer a service for free – but they need to make money to keep providing it. I’m looking forward to seeing how it all turns out.

@Igor – thanks – fixed

@Ron It’s true. I don’t know the type of data being offered – if any at all (check our update) that’s why I didn’t speculate on that. But I agree; it’s not a light topic and this is the beauty of blogs – we can talk about it in more detail here. :)

@Richard – good to hear that you guys are offering an opt-in. I think most social sites are trying to do that – we’re just living in experimental times.

@Katie – unfortunately while some of us see ads as spam, the companies providing the service need to make money so it becomes a real challenge. I for one can't wait until it’s all sorted out.

@Robert – I didn’t realize that you get ads based on sexual orientation (I’m not a user of Facebook) – but yeah, I can see how it would be annoying.

@Josh – Sorry I couldn’t give you more information – it’s all I had. But I do understand that Facebook has been allowing for ads to be targeted based on profile – although they claim to do it in a non identifiable (personal) way.

@Michelle and Carl – like I said earlier, sites that provide free services need to make money – and advertising is just one way that they can do this. Unfortunately, a lot of people put up too much information about themselves and then (sometimes too late) realize that the data may be used for other things. Often times, it’s a real trick to get the information back out

@Jonathanwthomas – I believe that they have been working on Engagement Ads, but I was under the impression that the polls had been dropped not long ago – see this post - regardless, it will be interesting to watch what happens this year with Facebook.

@ Geno – I don’t know. There are some free services that I would pay to use, yet others I’d be happy to drop if they started charging. Facebook and sites like it need to work out what’s best for them – and their users. I guess they need to make a call – charge for the service – or allow funds to come in via advertising. Certainly, it wouldn’t be cheap to maintain the service.

@Rich – I’m sorry you feel that way. Yes, the title could probably have been a lot clearer, but I tried to ensure the post was very clear in saying that the information was from the Telegraph – not Facebook itself. It’s difficult to get confirmations late at night, especially during the weekend, but I understand we’ll be analyzing this a little more in another post so stay tuned.

@Joe – You’re right. But boy, do you think you could quit with the name calling, it’s not necessary when your point is valid. :)

@A Beard – I would like to think that if social sites do try and use user information, that they would try and do it as best they can. I’m sure they wouldn’t want to lose their user base.

@Andrew You’re right. People need to stop and think about free services before they sign up because as you put it so well, maintaining this type of service certainly isn’t free - there has to be give and take.

@Jon I don’t think that any of the more reputable social sites would sell personally identifiable data – but I always wonder with the way that the Web is moving whether that data one day will somehow link all of that together. Certainly interesting times we live in.

@boiledpotato – Yeah, I think you’re right – advertising is still a bit of a hit and miss- but again, that could be exactly the reason why companies are trying to offer up parts of their user profiles – so that ads can be targeted better and you don’t end up with the cheesy ones. Delicate balance I think.

@armando Absolutely. Users should stand by their communities and help them out. Isn’t that what community is about anyway?

http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/group.php?gid=58542789084

And... advertisers have been able to target all kinds of demographics since FB ads started.

To A. Beard, I ask, why should Facebook somehow be obliged to allow users to opt-out? That may be true if Facebook was subscription-based, but not for a service that is going to have to rely on advertising dollars to keep going.

The opt-out is to stop using the service - and plenty of people might choose to if this is poorly implemented.

Thank You

Thanks for clarifying!

Pisses me off..... I sleep with men, well one man, but that doesn't mean I give a crap about circuit parties, gay cruises, etc....

RC

RT
www.internet-privacy.us.tc

1. Facebook isn't really selling user data - e.g. they are not going to know that my name is Ron West and that I live in North Attleboro and that I like Twitter. They will be selling demographic data and customers will say "We want to target people in North Attleboro who like Twitter". Saying it the way you said it will certainly freak people out. Certainly.

2. You have not clarified (or attempted to clarify) what type of data is being offered up. My Comments, my photos, my "Info" ....

I really enjoy reading your work and I am glad that you are adding young journalists like @jbruin - but this is the same type of "journalism" that the mainstream public sees in places like CNN, Fox etc....

This is not a lite topic and requires a bit more thought and information.