Thursday, 12 March 2009

Facebook gets another makeover

Facebook has revamped its interface yet again. Initial observations are as follows:

1. The site's news feed now follows a three column-layout. The far right column features 'highlights' - such as what groups your friends have joined, who or what they've become fans of, who was tagged, and so on. These no longer appear jumbled up in the news feed - instead, the middle column consists soley of status updates! The left column is a list of main apps like photos, videos, events, public profiles and so on.
2. Profile thumbnails are no longer square, they have rounded edges. Is this meant to make you feel all warm and fuzzy?
3. Twitter (I have the Twitter app installed) has automatically appeared in my sidebar - clearly, Facebook is feeling the threat.
4. Status updates ask you: What's on your mind? (See point 3)
5. Public Profile updates, like Barack Obama's, now appear in your news feed. You can choose to 'hide' these.
6. Default text is much larger but chat text is still very small.

Saturday, 28 February 2009

Facebook founder speaks to BBC

Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg has spoken to the BBC in a rare video interview about the recent concerns surrounding the company's privacy issues.

He said: "The person who's putting the content on Facebook always owns the information... They want to share it with only a few people and it's important that the information only goes to those people."

He added: "We're not going to sell or share the information except with the people that they've asked it to be shared."

Zuckerberg said that the advertising on the site has grown quickly and that is how it will make its money. And would not sell people's information on in order to do so. But to a lesser degree, Facebook is providing demographic information - not personally identifiable, but still personal information nonetheless - to advertisers.

Online advertisements need to be targeted to relevant markets. Let's look at how GMail works, for instance. I know my information remains personal, but the site still scans my emails for keywords and displays relevant advertisements down the site of the page that relate to those keywords. Effectively, my information is still being used for profit. The same thing happens on Facebook but to a greater degree. I've used its ad service, and have managed to narrow down demographics in order to buy targeted ads, and narrow down the number of targeted users by interest, age, relationship status and more.

Like I said, this isn't personally identifiable. But it means that your information is still being used for advertising, whether you like it or not.

Wednesday, 25 February 2009

Facebook: privacy vs advertising

The kerfuffle over Facebook's privacy policy continues.

PC World magazine has a good summary of the whole saga, along with interviews with the Electronic Privacy Information Center, who was about to lodge a formal 25-page complaint with the Federal Trade Commission before Facebook said it would revert to its old terms. Excecutive director Marc Rotenberg said: "We've been in this situation before with other companies that have really dug in their heels and tried to fight it out in the courts and the media. I think Facebook did the right thing."

Another interesting point from Rotenberg is how Facebook is meant to make money. Of course, it's with our data.

One new concern already on the horizon comes with Facebook's updated advertising models. The site is now utilizing APIs [application program interfaces] to pull user data off of status updates, Rotenberg says, then use it within ads placed on the page.

"People ... who care about privacy on Facebook typically don’t install applications, because they know that applications are pulling down a lot of their data. But if you're not installing applications and you learn that the information that you're putting in your status updates is being provided for advertising, you might be a little upset," Rotenberg says.

Source: PC World


Couple that with the column from Reuters; where the author discusses how Facebook, a private company, needs to make money through advertising, which is possibly at odds with people's privacy expectations. MySpace is not as popular these days as Facebook, but its garish straight-up advertising (which it does not need to spell out) - and its profitability - make it a good model for social networks.

Sunday, 22 February 2009

Facebook's bill of rights and responsibilities

Facebook's new Bill of Rights and Responsibilities group (80k members and counting) which was set up to debate how it should communicate its terms of service to users is a positive step. On the group, Facebook has responded to the most common questions asked by members:

1. You own your information. Facebook does not. This includes your photos and all other content.

2. Facebook doesn't claim rights to any of your photos or other content. We need a license in order to help you share information with your friends, but we don't claim to own your information.

3. We won't use the information you share on Facebook for anything you haven't asked us to. We realize our current terms are too broad here and they make it seem like we might share information in ways you don't want, but this isn't what we're doing.

4. We will not share your information with anyone if you deactivate your account. If you've already sent a friend a message, they'll still have that message. However, when you deactivate your account, all of your photos and other content are removed.

5. We apologize for the confusion around these issues. We never intended to claim ownership over people's content even though that's what it seems like to many people. This was a mistake and we apologize for the confusion.

Your own worst enemy

The hysteria over Facebook's terms of service and what it can do with your content largely ignores the most obvious and important thing:

You and your friends are the ones with the capability to post information about you online, not Facebook. The trail of stuff that you leave behind on Facebook (like the 'random 25 things about me' meme going around at the moment), is left voluntarily. Do you trust your friends not to post embarrassing personal details on your Wall about what you got up to last night? Take a look at most of the archived entries in this blog: the vast majority of privacy issues have nothing to do with Facebook's terms of service. Privacy issues have all happened because people haven't understood how Facebook works. The dynamic of the online world is significantly different than the online world, in that a digital footprint remains and if you don't follow the rules, your content may be seen by people you don't want.

In addition to not opening your heart on to Facebook, use the privacy settings that are provided within Facebook - check out the 10 Privacy Settings Every Facebook User Should Know.

Wednesday, 18 February 2009

Facebook backtracks on Terms of Service

After a huge community backlash about the fuzzy nature of Facebook's terms of service, the social networking website has reverted to its old Terms of Service while it figures out what to do.

While Facebook is hardly going to use your data any which way it pleases, it's certainly a step forward to try and make its Terms of Service clear.

Upon logging in, the following message appears:

Terms of Use Update

Over the past few days, we have received a lot of feedback about the new terms we posted two weeks ago. Because of this response, we have decided to return to our previous Terms of Use while we resolve the issues that people have raised. For more information, visit the Facebook Blog.

If you want to share your thoughts on what should be in the new terms, check out our group Facebook Bill of Rights and Responsibilities.


Tuesday, 17 February 2009

Does Facebook 'own' your data?

Facebook quietly updated its terms of service last week, sparking outcry among consumer advocates who interpreted the changes as meaning that Facebook can do what it wants with your data at any time. Forever. Even when you leave the service.

The Consumerist weblog (it's part of the non-profit conusmer rights publication Consumer Reports) cited some pretty scary changes that Facebook made to its terms, which are the conditions you agree to when you use it. The Consumerist wrote:

'Facebook's terms of service used to say that when you closed an account on their network, any rights they claimed to the original content you uploaded would expire. Not anymore.

'Now, anything you upload to Facebook can be used by Facebook in any way they deem fit, forever, no matter what you do later. Want to close your account? Good for you, but Facebook still has the right to do whatever it wants with your old content. They can even sublicense it if they want.'

Facebook has since responded and defended itself, saying that the changes don't, apparently, give it carte blanche to do what it likes with your content, and if you deactivate your account, it will respect the privacy settings you had put in place prior.

What it does mean though is that your content won't be deleted from, say, a friend's Wall when you delete your Facebook account, in the same way that an email you send a friend won't be deleted when you delete your email account. A representative from Facebook told The Industry Standard:

'We are not claiming and have never claimed ownership of material that users upload. The new Terms were clarified to be more consistent with the behavior of the site. That is, if you send a message to another user (or post to their wall, etc...), that content might not be removed by Facebook if you delete your account (but can be deleted by your friend). Furthermore, it is important to note that this license is made subject to the user's privacy settings. So any limitations that a user puts on display of the relevant content (e.g. To specific friends) are respected by Facebook. Also, the license only allows us to use the info "in connection with the Facebook Service or the promotion thereof." Users generally expect and understand this behavior as it has been a common practice for web services since the advent of webmail. For example, if you send a message to a friend on a webmail service, that service will not delete that message from your friend's inbox if you delete your account.'
After the outcry from Facebook users, who set up protest groups such as 'FACEBOOK OWNS YOU: Protest the new changes to the TOS!', founder Mark Zuckenberg responded on the official company blog, clarifying that the terms were changed to make it clearer that information may appear in two places, such as when a person sends a message to a friend.

'We think this is the right way for Facebook to work, and it is consistent with how other services like email work,' he wrote, adding that 'in reality, we wouldn't share your information in a way you wouldn't want. The trust you place in us as a safe place to share information is the most important part of what makes Facebook work. Our goal is to build great products and to communicate clearly to help people share more information in this trusted environment.'

What Zuckenberg acknowledged was that, 'We're at an interesting point in the development of the open online world where these issues are being worked out. It's difficult terrain to navigate and we're going to make some missteps, but as the leading service for sharing information we take these issues and our responsibility to help resolve them very seriously.'

The interesting thing about all this is that Facebook hasn't amended the terms of service to make it clearer to users. Why doesn't it just give an example like the one they mentioned about about how your content might still stay on their system? Why does the fine print have to include so much legalese? Google has a privacy page that gives examples in plain English about how your data is used, and why.

Also, the way Facebook works isn't just like someone's inbox - it has public parts, semi-public parts, photos and applications. It's a completely different dynamic. All very interesting stuff!