The Day Has Come: Facebook Pushes People to Go Public
Facebook announced this morning that its 350 million users will be prompted to make their status messages and shared content publicly visible to the world at large and search engines. It's a move we expected but the language used in the announcement is near Orwellian. The company says the move is all about helping users protect their privacy and connect with other people, but the new default option is to change from "old settings" to becoming visible to "everyone."
This is not what Facebook users signed up for. It's not about privacy at all, it's about increasing traffic and the visibility of activity on the site.
Update: See also our in-depth interview with Barry Schnitt, Director of Corporate Communications and Public Policy at Facebook, about why these changes were made.
Information like your email address is recommended to remain limited to friends, but make no mistake about it - Facebook wants you to make the status messages you post visible to the entire internet.
According to the video explaining the changes, the new default for status messages is "everyone." That's a huge change. Of course it's not hard for people to keep their existing privacy settings, but confusion around what those settings are is hardly resolved by the phrase "old settings" and a tool-tip phrase appearing when you hover over that option.
Update: Some users are saying that their default options are in fact on "old settings" and not "everyone." We're hearing that "old settings" as private is the default for users who have ever changed their privacy settings and set them to private. People who have not changed their settings ever or who have set them to public already, will be defaulted to public. That's what we think, it's hard to know for sure. Facebook is maddeningly unclear about what exactly is going on. Part of the problem is that they are willing to tell press that they want to move users toward being more public, but when communicating with its users they appear to put more emphasis on communicating about privacy than is warranted by the changes at issue.
the Facebook blog post about the announcement. Previous moves by the company, like the introduction of the news feed, have seen user resistance as well - but this move cuts against the fundamental proposition of Facebook: that your status updates are only visible to those you opt-in to exposing them to. You'll now have to opt-out of being public and opt-in to communicating only with people you've given permission to see your content.Will users go for it? If Facebook becomes a lot more like Twitter, will users stick around? The network of friends you've created on Facebook can't be taken anywhere else - access to those people off-site is limited due to "privacy concerns."
This is an amazing move that was announced with limited press attention. A Facebook group message to press was sent out at 6am, two hours before a press phone call. The announcement is a long, wordy and unclear text putting undue emphasis on Privacy when the new options clearly favor going public. Earlier this week the company made an announcement about forthcoming privacy policy changes and Open was not the recommended setting.
A much more honest approach to privacy would be to encourage users to create lists of contacts and encourage them to select which list any update was visible to. Instead, that's greatly underemphasized.
Expect to see this story blow up for the rest of the year. It's a very big move.
See our previous coverage for context:
Facebook Wants You To Be Less Private - But Why?
A Closer Look at Facebook's New Privacy Options
Is Facebook a Cult?
Share
Facebook
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all ReadWriteWeb posts
As you've pointed out, the "privacy" changes are all about encouraging users to share more stuff publicly. The transition tool and other changes actually discourage or eliminate some privacy protections that Facebook users currently employ.
We go through some of the biggest problems on our blog at http://tr.im/H7v2. We also have a great Facebook transition resource page to help users understand the details of what has changed – for better and for worse: http://tr.im/H84f
- ACLU of Northern California
I don't think this move particularly Twitterises the service? Although much of Twitter is predicated on public sharing, so is Facebook. Much as some Facebook users remain private, I know many Twitter users (including myself) who keep their updates private and only visible to their followers.
It does screw up the system - you miss out on a wjhole welter of Twitterish lifestyle but frankly, given everything that that includes (spam users being a major factor) thank God you *can* miss out on the bigger picture :)
It may increase traffic on Facebook, but the utility of the site as a primary communications channel with Friends and Family is cheapened. It hasn't taken Facebook long to go the way of email and become a SPAM generator.
Unfortunately the new settings do not include an important privacy option that existed before: the possibility to hide our own friends list to some people or lists! I find it a big violation of my own privacy: I chose to hide my friends list from some groups of people who could just access the mutual friends, now they can see my whole list.
Yeah... no.
Or at least, making everything public destroys a certain level of casual intimacy that currently exists.
This will open the door for a service that provides Facebook capability while ensuring privacy.
My experience was different from what the article and video described. The default position for all my checkmarks was the right column 'Old Settings' and not the left. I think my privacy settings are much higher than the average, though.
That's not a good idea for many people that tend to over-share what they're doing or "What's on your mind," before I would have been all for this, but now I am against being open to everyone, there are just some people you don't want to know what's going on in your life.
Think about it Facebook!
If the new system makes my profile any less private than it currently is, then I'll be forced to deactivate my account until they fix it.
I cannot and will not have the things I do on Facebook visible to the world at large. I use it to communicate with my friends only, privately. I do not want to use it as another blogging platform.
The language was doublespeak. Why not talk about the benefits of being more open with your updates and information? Could it be because the only benefits are to Facebook's bottom line?
That being said, when I was directed to the page to select my new settings, the defaults pre-selected were all "old settings".
I did notice it now seemed to indicate that I could no longer hide my profile and picture from being public/searchable. I'll have to dig to see if that's true.
I heard it's now mandatory that one must be listening to Nickelback, while having one's shirt collar "popped", in order to successfully sign into Facebook - is that true?
Seems like Facebook is intimidated by Twitter, to me. Trying to play catch-up isn't a wise business move -- they should keep themselves distinguished from Twitter, if you ask me. The change is also motivated by marketing/ad/info-mining money, too. I wonder if there's a way to have a social site like FB but use Wikipedia's model of being ad-less & user sponsored. Keep the silly games, user-defined privacy and simple design just drop the user info mining. Yeah, I'll keep dreaming.
You know, I moved completely from MySpace to Facebook a while ago for the single reason that random, trolling morons can't access my page and info. I know that a lot of people made the move from MySpace to FB for that same reason -- I hope the folks at FB see a drop in whatever they look at to measure success.
I'm going to stay private on FB... if I want the world to know what I'm thinking, I'll tweet it.
This is more of the same slow-motion suicide for Facebook. I was irritated to see them suggest "Everyone" for some data I had previously limited to specific audiences. I tightened my own visibility settings, and will delete even MORE data from my profile. It's almost useless to the public already.
Investors and advertisers please note: through this crude sleight of hand, Facebook has increased your access to profiles of ~unsophisticated~ users. You now are paying for a larger, though less intelligent and less aware audience. Maybe that's a good fit for you. If so, you deserve it.
However, Facebook will lose data and memberships of thought leaders, professionals, and other upper income audiences. Your days of targeting them across Facebook are essentially over... and you deserve that, too.
Facebook ultimately wants me to remove my account.
@Flavio I share your thinking on that.
It is unacceptable that Facebook is REDUCING our privacy by making it so that anyone in the world can now see our Friend List!!
I know that some people don't care - and that's fine if those people want to make their Friend List public for the world to see.
But to me, it is no one else's business who my friends are. And the entire planet - most of whom I don't know - should not be able to see my friend's list regardless of what my personal preferences are.
Until now, Friend List could be private. Now, Facebook is making is requiring Friend List to be public to the world, with no option to make it private.
That is reducing privacy. And a big step back.
This is a really big privacy issue, and the press should be writing about this worrisome violation of privacy in facebook.
While the BBC reports - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8404284.stm
Yeah, re BBC, for some reason all other press outlets are eating up the official FB line. But the ACLU and a former FB exec on Twitter agree with my assessment and FB PR hasn't called to refute it, as they usually do. I think I've just been following this story closer than most other people and am thinking more critically about it.
Spin in a press release? Surely you must be joking!
Seriously, though, I believe them when they say users have asked to be able to make things more open. I think going more open is the right thing to do. Now whether or not they went about it the right way can be debated, but let's not sacrifice a good end result because they didn't present it exactly how we would have liked.
Facebook is not twitter - I don't think most users want their profile to be public or they’d be on MySpace.
One issue no one seems to be bringing up is the confusing way Facebook made you choose between "old settings" to or "everyone.” I think users are being confused into unwittingly making their info public.
I found the transition tool very smooth and I thought it was very clear as to what was happening.
It translated across all of my previous settings and nothing is more open than it was before (and I didn't have paranoid settings!).
My updates are (still) not public.
Joel
It will make facebook more close to twitter in the interesting and opening more data to the world.
I quote Dave Doolin (commenter above)...
Yeah... no.
Now everyone can see my profile photo, friends, and pages.
Im deactivating until this is fixed
-reallllly pissed off right now
Wow, I am impressed dude!
RT
www.web-anonymity.se.tc
@Michelle I agree, I think that some users would assume that "everyone" is everyone in their network, not the general public. Especially given that there are so many teenagers who may unwittingly post information to the general public, I think this is somewhat irresponsible. I think that Facebook knows that not everyone is going to dissect and fully understand every update they make, making it easier to spin the news.
I decided to go public a couple of months ago. Like every one else, I initially decided to make almost everything private. I was afraid of someone I know but not on my friends list seeing some stupid thing I said, or some stupid picture or whatever else. This i decided, you know what, I am who I am. Why hide it? What am I hiding from?
"Public" has always been the default, right? Don't you have to go in and change the settings to make it private? Because I was public for several months when I first joined before realizing that i had to change the settings. there are still lots of users who are public just because they don't know any better.
i wish facebook would stop trying to be more & more like twitter. they will end up losing their userbase!
Facebook is either shady or really bad communicators or both.
I've noticed that my status updates have been indexed by Google for a while, even though they are supposed to be "friends only" - I triple checked. It seems that recently, if you had the public profile box ticked (which to me only meant you had a summary page people could find, like on LinkedIn) then FB was sharing much more than you thought.
You are assuming that most people won't make a choice.. I agree.. and they won't care either
Facebook is for 1) exhibitionists and 2) voyeurs. I hope it clarifies everything.
Facebook is a great community. I use principally for the games in there, and the best is FootBattle!
http://apps.facebook.com/footbattle?zref=ntptspl
Every now and then, some bright spark has a brilliant idea which becomes very popular.
And then when it gets huge, businesses try to monetise it.
And then it gets spammy
And then it gets more spammy
And then it's ruined and no one uses it anymore...
I wouldn't be happy to see it being forced on users but as long as there is an option to turn it off I think that's perfectly fine.
I also think it's a tedious move in the wrong direction. Not that most users will even pay attention but that those who do care will kick up a fuss. It's change afterall and most people don't react well to change.
There definitely are some privacy concerns raised by making "everyone" the default option and not providing more default "levels" of privacy for a new or less-informed user. Check out some of CDT's thoughts at our blog at http://bit.ly/6WDWJ2.
I am very impressed by this blog. You are right on. By making it impossible to hide your friends (note that Twitter does not have an option to hide friends either) and by encouraging users to set their privacy options for statuses and all else to 'Everyone' it is quite clear what facebook is trying to do. The not being able to hide my friends list is actually a pretty big deal to a lot of users. This was just unnecessary.
Like Dtkirby I also found that for the first and second section 'Old Settings' was default. I spent a while going through all the various privacy settings a few months ago, and perhaps this is why. The third section (Email, IM, Phone, Address) had defaulted to 'Friends', but my Old Settings were set to Friends anyway.
Maybe it either a) Defaults to Old Settings if the privacy settings are higher, or b) Defaults to the least privacy if you have not previously edited any privacy settings.
The former would seem to be OK, the latter would not. Does anyone know what the default settings were previously?
Time to start deleting personal information off of facebook...
I'm inches away from deleting my Facebook account. There are only two people that I'm not connected to somewhere else.
I've been on Facebook since the very beginning when you needed a college e-mail address to signup. They had to open up to the public to remain marketable and this new "default" setting is for the same reason.
Thanks for sharing.
oh no the website that I decided to use voluntarily that is privately held as well has decided to change how they do business. They did so without raising the rate I pay (oh wait..I don't pay for the service?) too. Those animals! How dare they. Yeah a shame the possibility of replying with a giant rolleyes emoticon isn't something I can do.
Honestly, everytime Facebook changes anything half of the users immediately threaten to quit and then quickly go back to using it regularly. Newsworthy change yes, orwellian invasion of privacy? Not even close.
I didn't go public..why would I?
This is facebook moving in on realtime "social" search. all those conversations are worth gold to researchers and brands
Does anyone know how to go back to the old settings??
or Ill have to cancel my account :S
The best way is to obfuscate your information enough to not confuse your friends but definetely facebook and others. Take that 'data monetizers'.
When i logged in yesterday it was the first thing i saw on my page. It prompted me to change my settings to everyone. I just selected "Old Settings" and clicked ok. No big deal really.
"Everyone" on Facebook, not on the internet
OK.
So I just selected old settings for everything and on the next page it ignored my selections and stated what it had selected by default!
Screenshots available, if you want them, mail me.
So many of these comments are downright hilarious! How many times have you people been told, if you are concerned about your privacy online, YOU SHOULD NEVER POST ANY DATA!
Really people, you've all CHOSEN to use Facebook. Nobody forced you to. Nobody NEEDS to use Facebook for anything. I love the comment from someone who "uses it for private communications with friends" and is concerned the privacy settings will destroy that ability. Dude, use encrypted email it that's your only reason for using Facebook.
Also, isn't the main purpose of FB to connect people? That's really hard if your profile picture is hidden.
My advice to all of you: Get a life. There are far more important things to do before you die.
The best way is to obfuscate your information enough to not confuse your friends but definetely facebook and others. Take that 'data monetizers'.
1 2 Next