Is Facebook Really Ruining Christmas?
Political action and consumer advocacy organization MoveOn this week launched a public campaign against Facebook's new Project Beacon advertising system (our coverage). MoveOn characterizes the ad system as "a huge invasion of privacy" and has launched a petition to get Facebook to make the system completely opt-in (rather than opt-out as it is currently). MoveOn even blames Facebook for ruining Christmas, including in a press release sent out to the media today quotes from users like this one: "I saw my gf [girlfriend] bought an item I had been saying I wanted...so now part of my Christmas gift has been ruined. Facebook is ruining Christmas!" - Matthew from New York
According to MoveOn's Civic Communications Director Adam Green, "Facebook users across the nation are outraged that the books, movies, and gifts they buy privately on other sites are being displayed publicly without permission--and it's time for Facebook to reverse this massive privacy breach." (CNET) There are a few problems with that statement, though.
First, MoveOn may be overstating the level of outrage among Facebook users. In the past, when Facebook has done something that users don't like (i.e., create the news feed, open up to non-college users, etc.), many groups have been created almost overnight to protest the issue. Those groups have grown virally, quickly and often top hundreds of thousands of users in a matter of days. Just recently, hundreds of groups popped up around Facebook to protest the mandatory use of the word "is" in status updates -- one group had over 160,000 users. I could not find any group, barring MoveOn's own, protesting Beacon (or SocialAds) with over 100.
MoveOn's group, which launched Tuesday, has just over 8,000 members at press time. That's not phenomenal growth, especially considering the amount of press it has had in publications like the LA Times, New York Times, and Wall Street Journal. Adam Green guaranteed me that the group was growing quickly and would "soon be in the tens of thousands" -- to be fair, it has grown by about 2,000 users in the past 7 hours, and it seems likely that it will top 10,000 soon. (Green would not share with me the number of people who had signed their petition. Update: Green sent me a follow on email to tell me that the petition numbers are approximately in line with the Facebook group, though he does not have the exact figure at this time.)
But if something as benign as a constrictive verb in status updates can inspire hundreds of protest groups -- some with over 100,000 users -- but something like this can only get the support of a few thousands people, even this early on, it makes you wonder whether Facebook users are really all that bothered by Project Beacon.
The other thing wrong with Green's statement to CNET, is that Facebook's Beacon ads aren't displayed publicly (unless you count your network of friends and their computer screens as the public), nor are they displayed without permission. Anyone who has run into Beacon ads in the wild knows that Facebook asks before publishing information to your news feed (see image above). Further, you can opt-out for good from having retailers send information to Facebook. MoveOn argues that the opt-out tools aren't good enough, and this is where they finally make some very good points.
Beacon Needs A Blanket Opt-Out Feature
The most glaring omission from the opt-out feature is that you can't opt-out from the entire program. You have to do it on a site-by-site basis, and are only given the opportunity AFTER you've visited that site and it has collected data from you. When TechCrunch first broke the Beacon story, they included a screenshot (below) showing that users could opt-out from the program entirely by checking a single radio button. However, when Beacon went live, that feature was conspicuously missing.
What happened to the blanket opt-out feature? Image from TechCrunch.
While I'm not convinced that the program necessarily needs to be opt-in, Facebook certainly needs to provide a blanket opt-out option. Forcing users to continuously update their privacy settings every time they come in contact with a new Beacon partner is obnoxious and a good way to turn users against the system.
One thing that MoveOn fails to address, and which may be a more serious potential privacy violation, is that even after opting out of the program, there is nothing to guarantee that Facebook isn't still collecting data on where you shop and what you buy, and using it to deliver ads on the site. I'm not a legal expert by any stretch of the imagination, but I could find nothing in the Facebook privacy policy that guaranteed that opting out of Beacon meant that Facebook would no longer receive data from those partners. In cases like this, whose privacy policy supercedes the other, Facebook's or the third-party web site's?
Anyone who want to completely opt-out of Beacon now, can follow these instructions for how to block the ads in Firefox.
A Separate Privacy Issue At Facebook
So while MoveOn may be overstating the level of user anger over Beacon, their campaign makes at least one good point: Facebook needs to provide better opt-out tools and do a better job of publicizing privacy options to users. That said, there is, in my opinion, a more pressing privacy violation occurring on Facebook right now. Yesterday, VentureBeat reported that Facebook applications now have access to user email. This, like everything else on Facebook, is opt-out, but unfortunately, for any application you've already installed you're opted in by default. Sorry, makers of Scrabulous and Bloggific, I like your applications, but I don't want you bothering me via email.
It's bothersome that Facebook automatically gave third-party application developers (you know, the ones who made the apps that they expressly warn you were not developed by Facebook) access to my email without my permission -- and without notifying me of the change. Worse, when installing new applications, the "Allow this application to..." settings, do not include the email option. Which means that after installation, you have to take an extra step to disable the ability for that app's developers to send you email. Thanks for making me jump through hoops to keep my privacy, Facebook.
Conclusion
So is Beacon evil? I don't think so. Is it ruining Facebook? Not yet, at least, not for me. I haven't seen a ton of Beacon ads appear on my news feed, and Facebook in the past day or two introduced "thumbs up" and "X" icons next to items on the news feed that train it to give you more of what you like. I haven't seen a Beacon ad in a couple of days, but I do see the voting options next to "Name is a fan of company" items (which I believe are part of SocialAds), so I would imagine they are on Beacon feed posts as well. If that's the case, you should theoretically be able to train your feed not to show you as much Beacon material -- or, one can hope that's the case.
But are there legitimate privacy concerns with Beacon? That seems likely. Hopefully Zuckerberg and Co. listen to MoveOn, at least insofar as to add a blanket opt-out feature to the system -- one which they apparently once planned to include. And even more pressing in my mind, I hope they stop updating my privacy permissions on installed applications without my knowledge (i.e., giving apps developers permission to email me), and rather make changes like that opt-in instead of opt-out.
What do you think about Beacon? Is MoveOn blowing a lot of hot air or has Facebook crossed the line? What about the email options on Facebook applications, are you okay with them or upset? Let us know in the comments below.
Share3 TrackBacks
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.readwriteweb.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1784
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all ReadWriteWeb posts
The problem with Facebook, it seems, is that they don't communicate what their doing very well, and do not seem to be embracing user rights as a fundamental principal.
They seem to be trying to get away with as much as they can and hoping people will just get over it.
They need to take more pro-active steps to introduce these things in a way that is informed, optional and respectful - including support for open standards and opt-in rather than opt-out options.
Facebook doesn't ruin Christmas... News about Facebook ruins Christmas. :) I know it's a huge deal, but I don't think I'm alone in seeing a Facebook headline and instantly turning the channel.
I personally think the whole FaceBook privacy issue stinks, and the network it's self is over rated.
The only things it had above the other networks was a tidy interface, a lack of spam and the social gaming.
The interface is progressively getting messier, opensocial means that the games/apps are now going to be on all networks, and beacon seems to be the gates of hell for as far as spam is concerned.
The reason I stop using most online services is when advertising becomes intrusive. I haven't seen any reason to believe that beacon will not be like that, and if ti does I will be instantly looking for a new network with better privacy settings.
While I understand people's privacy concerns over all these new technologies, I also understand Facebook's side of the story: making money. They're providing an excellent service at no charge - they have to get compensation somehow. While options like a blanket opt-out would be great, I'm surprised at some people's attitude that this is a "right" Facebook users have.
Speaking of intrusive... Augh! Snap rollovers! Die die die!
Both IE and Firefox have custom options for cookies. The cookie created for your facebook account should be allowed only for the session, not for always. And you should make sure to click "log off" facebook when you indeed go away from facebook, this should erase the said cookie. When that is in place, partner sites have no way to know you have a facebook account. Problem solved.
I think the worst apps are those that get access to your friends' emails to get in contact with them. A few times I have received emails from apps telling me that a friend wants me to install it.
Those apps get instantly blocked.
I must say though, if I were to see a beacon ad that showed me what my girlfriend was buying me for Christmas, I think I would be pretty annoyed too. Until that happens, well, until I've seen any beacon ads, which hasn't happened yet, I don't really know what to think.
I do think Facebook is pushing the envelope here...and would be better served with some more though about giving more control to the users.
As a facebook app developer I love the idea of having access to email although I do think it should really be opt-in rather then opt-out.
-Jitendra
"Further, you can opt-out for good from having retailers send information to Facebook."
Is that actually true? Where is this opt-out?
As far as I understand, Facebook still receive all the data that gets sent; the only thing you can opt-out on is having it displayed on your profile.
Now, some websites may provide the option themselves (such as Kongregate did), but that is still far from adequate. If I opt out on Facebook, Facebook should NOT get this data, period.
Incidentally, that link contains an interesting work around (Firefox only, I think) on how to block it completely, something which I've implemented myself, but frankly, this should be default behaviour.
I noticed you seemed rather outraged that applications would have access to your e-mail. I also noticed you didn't stop to verify that this is the case. Applications have always had the ability to CONTACT you via e-mail through Facebook's platform. In doing which they do not see your address, but just route a message through Facebook to your e-mail. What has recently happened is that they have given you an opt out of that at a more granular level. Prior to this change your opt-out was accross all applications. Now you are prompted on the addition of every application to decide what access you would like to give.
You are no better than MoveOn in over-reacting to mis-information. I am sure there will be 10 other blogs that will read yours and further the game of telephone without actually looking at the platform in question.
@Craig: I meant sending stories to Facebook. Sorry for the confusion.
@Kurt: Well, that just highlights an even more serious breach of privacy. But thanks for sharing that information so politely.
Anyone who isn't concerned about the ongoing assault on privacy by various web based companies is living in lala land. It's not just FB or Google or Myspace, but it is nearly all internet companies. Facebook is just the latest in this trend, or rather the latest big one.
Facebook may not be evil, but it's close. Zuckerberg said "nothing influences a person more than a recommendation from a trusted friend". He's right. Unfortunately, when two third party corporations step in between the friends to send an impersonal notice to one of the other's purchase, it is not "a trusted recommendation from a friend". Not even close. Perhaps it makes sense to Zuckerberg because he's only 12 years old. When you're 12, if you find out your friend got some new toy you immediately ask your parents to buy you the same one and start crying if they refuse. Most people, unfortunately for facebook, find that game silly by the time they become adults and want nothing to do with it.
People want an easy way to communicate with their friends. I'm on facebook because all my friends are on facebook. But signing up to a new network takes less than 5 minutes. As soon as there is a competitor willing to offer the additional value of respecting user privacy, the majority of facebook users won't think twice about leaving. The web is a competitive place so it won't take long for that to happen. With this horrible invasive ad idea 12 year old Zuckerberg has put a noose around facebook's neck.
I noticed you seemed rather outraged that applications would have access to your e-mail. I also noticed you didn't stop to verify that this is the case. Applications have always had the ability to CONTACT you via e-mail through Facebook's platform. In doing which they do not see your address, but just route a message through Facebook to your e-mail. What has recently happened is that they have given you an opt out of that at a more granular level. Prior to this change your opt-out was accross all applications. Now you are prompted on the addition of every application to decide what access you would like to give.
You are no better than MoveOn in over-reacting to mis-information. I am sure there will be 10 other blogs that will read yours and further the game of telephone without actually looking at the platform in question.
On both LiveJournal and TypePad, where we've implemented Beacon so far at Six Apart, we've made it so that our users must first opt-in before notifying Facebook. As you and others have pointed out, it is extremely important to keep people in control over where their actions are being sent around the web.
--David
I think the reason that massive "protest groups" haven't formed (like in the past) is because only a very small percentage of Facebook users have been exposed to Beacon (I personally haven't seen it in action yet).
The other protest groups, whether about Facebook opening up to the public or about the infamous news feed, affected everyone on Facebook and in the latter case the changes were extremely obvious. This case, not so much.
I am one facebook user that will not be joining a protest group because I have completely stopped using facebook altogether. I simply hated the news feed, but calmed down when I was able to opt out of it so my friends couldn't see my every move on facebook. When the externally created apps first came onto facebook I didn't like the looks of them, either. Anything with a disclaimer that says [paraphrased] "facebook isn't responsible for what these outside companies do" isn't something in which I will participate. I didn't have to participate, though, because they were opt-in. Seeing that now there's this issue with Beacon, I'm just done. I check my facebook account about once a month, and next time I check it I will be closing it.
How many birds can you kill with one stone? Don't use FaceBook. It's that simple.
Does anybody know where to find a code to add the Facebook Beacon to my website http://f-source.com ?
The outrage seems overblown. If you don't like what Facebook's doing, don't use it. They're a money-making company, not a charity. If they do things that are outrageous, then an alternative will overtake them in the market.
Opt-out would be good, as would more clarity from Facebook when they implement changes to their system. Their license makes me reluctant to post any "User Content" to their system, since I'm basically signing away my rights to it. But if people actually read licenses, they would know that.
I shut down my Facebook account.
"But if something as benign as a constrictive verb in status updates can inspire hundreds of protest groups -- some with over 100,000 users -- but something like this can only get the support of a few thousands people, even this early on, it makes you wonder whether Facebook users are really all that bothered by Project Beacon."
Ha! Ha! Ha!
11/20/07 - 1 member
11/20/07 - 5,000 members
11/22/07 - 10,000 members
11/23/07 - 15,000 members
11/25/07 - 20,000 members
11/26/07 - 25,000 members
11/27/07 - 35,000 members
11/28/07 - 45,000 members
11/29/07 - 50,000 members
Late 11/29/07 - Victory!