Click on the below presentation to have a good look at the new Facebook privacy changes. Generally positive, in that Facebook will put all the privacy settings in one place and eliminate regional networks. So many users thought their profiles were open only to friends, but were in a regional network where default settings left items like photos open to all 10 million people in the region. I also like that users will be able to decide who should see items at the time they publish or share them.
Note, however, that the new defaults make more information in new profiles public by default, and ask current users to update their settings to make some basic information public – such as your hometown, religion, marital status etc. Facebook explains that this is to help users better find each other. I get that, because the other day I was looking through 25 profiles of someone with a common name and couldnt figure out which was my old pal. (Pics were of dogs, kids, mountains or no pic!….hometown and religion would have been a good clue!). I am pleased that they do not make birth date public in the new flow, that would surely annoy some of my friends and family who are touchy about their age. One piece of advice for users – hide your hometown, too many companies use it as your security question.
“They are learning how to listen carefully to their users,” said Jules Polonetsky, co-chairman and director of the Washington-based Future of Privacy Forum and former chief privacy officer at AOL. He added that Facebook has learned from the past that suddenly making big changes, whatever they are, has not been the most effective approach.
“To be lots of things to lots of different kinds of people,” Polonetsky said, Facebook needs to give its users, who come from different cultures, age groups and career levels, more control over what they share on the site.
PFF Congressional Seminar: Regulating Online Advertising: What Will it Mean for Consumers, Culture & Journalism? – July 10, 2009
Progress & Freedom Foundation
Congressional Seminar
Regulating Online Advertising: What Will it Mean for Consumers, Culture & Journalism?
July 10, 2009
12:00pm to 2:00pm
Capitol Visitor Center
Room SVC-208
1st Street and East Capitol Street, NE
Washington DC, 20002
Proposals to regulate advertising and data collection on the Internet, mobile phones and other interactive television, hold the promise of enhancing consumer privacy. On the other hand, “smart advertising” allows more relevant advertising to be targeted directly to individual consumers, making markets more competitive, significantly increasing the funding available for creating free content and services, and increasing the effectiveness of all forms of free speech. So what would regulation cost consumers, and how will it impact journalism and other non-commercial content, which stands to gain the most from better targeting? What First Amendment questions would regulation raise about the future of culture and political disclosure? These and other pressing questions will be discussed at “Regulating Online Advertising: What Will it Mean for Consumers, Culture & Journalism?,” a congressional seminar hosted by The Progress & Freedom Foundation.
Speakers:
Berin Szoka (Moderator), Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Internet Freedom, The Progress & Freedom Foundation
Howard Beales, Associate Professor, Department of Strategic Management and Public Policy, The George Washington University
Thomas Lenard, President & Senior Fellow, Technology Policy Institute
Jules Polonetsky, Co-Chair & Director, Future of Privacy Forum
Mark Adams, Visiting Fellow, The Progress & Freedom Foundation
A Posterboy for Advertising’s Pro-Consumer Quid Pro Quo | The Technology Liberation Front
I enjoy reading the Tech Liberation Front blog, even though I am far less sure that the “privacy” free market is working as well as the TLF bloggers contend. But the writers are often witty, sharp and entertaining and are deeply immersed in privacy issues. It has been nice getting to know Berin Szoka, TLF blogger and Progress and Freedom Foundation fellow, and I look forward to some spirited sparring with him at next weeks Capitol Hill PFF event Regulating Online Advertising.
Berin recently blogged about a favorite DC yogurt shop, Mr Yogato’s, which gives patrons a discount if they allow a promotional “stamp” on their foreheads. He makes the point that there is “no free lunch” and that online the trade consumers make for free content is that they are shown advertising.
Berin is correct, of course, there is no free lunch. Online, data supported advertising is part of the trade-off for free content. But to use the Mr Yogato analogy, here is what is happening online – consumers are having a cookie ID number quietly stamped on the back on their necks, aren’t told about any discount for their yogurt purchase, and then policymakers are told that all is fair because yogurt shops would go out of business if they couldn’t earn revenue by tracking or marketing to users in this manner.
I think much of the consumer and legislative concern about tracking would dissipate if more online companies would be as upfront with their customers as Mr. Yogato is with his. Some of us are happy to have our forehead stamped, some prefer to answer trivia questions and others will pay full fare.
Would you allow your forehead to be stamped in return for a discount? My wife says she would, but I am still thinking about it.
Before you click
How To Filter Out Facebook "Friends" Without Them Knowing
This is a very useful and humane way to manage your friends on facebook! Too much noise and missing out on the info from the friends you want to “hear” from”?
The Future of Privacy Forum is seeking two legal, policy or technology fellows to join our think tank. You will be involved with leading edge work at the center of the privacy debates and will work on issues ranging from behavioral advertising and social media issues to the smart grid and identity management. Small stipend available. Ideal for a law grad deferring the start of law firm job. Significant responsibility on day one and a great opportunity to interact with senior figures in academia, government, corporations, advocacy groups and law firms. We can offer a flexible location and schedule, but need someone ready to meet deadlines and be able to react rapidly to new issues and opportunities.
Please see fpf.org for more information about us. Email [email protected] with your resume and a letter of interest to apply.
Targeted Advertising Cookie Opt-Out (TACO) On A Roll
Privacy activist and technologist Chris Soghoian has updated his TACO opt-out plug-in to include 44 additional ad networks. Users who download TACO automatically get opt-out cookies from 84 ad networks, cookie tracking companies and others offering an opt-out cookie. Importantly, this opt-out sticks even if users inadvertently delete opt-out cookies.
Since we well know that setting an ordinary opt-out cookie is a defective option, since so many users loose opt-out cookies to anti-spyware programs (or to their own browser controls), why should any ad network offer an opt-out cookie without also advising users of the need for a plug-in that will help maintain the opt-out? Google provides one for the opt-out from its ad targeting DoubleClick cookie and the TACO is available at no cost for anyone else. The Network Advertising Initiative has hinted that it is working on a plug-in for its members and TRUSTe could probably do the same. We predict that plug-ins will soon be proliferating.
Is this a good thing? It is better than doing nothing. But it’s time for the browser companies to get on this pronto, so that a special download is not needed. Give Web sites a way to offer users a privacy choice that the browser can reliably maintain! Respect user choice!
The Political Ad Practice Insiders Want to Keep Secret – ClickZ
My cookie says I am a moderate Democrat soccer dad who is a “triple prime” voter. (Look it up, if you’re not a political geek like me). Folks who are paying attention to the privacy issues around behavioral advertising are very focused on ads targeted based on the Web sites you have visited. But, in fact, more ad dollars are probably spent on appending offline data like the political data discussed here, as well as data from the big data brokers or data about your customer relationships with your bank and stores you frequent. Any industry self regulatory solutions or legislative proposals should recognize that basic cookie clickstream targeting was state of the art 9 years ago. The industry has moved far beyond, but the discussions seem frozen in the past and dont seem to consider the far more complicated world of online data use today. Jeff Chester ‘s blog is a must read for an understanding of how sophisticated and complex some of the online targeting has become. It is true that some of the folks Jeff documents who are claiming to target ads based on brain waves and eyeball movements are probably full of hot air, but anyone who thinks we are talking about simple anonymous cookies helping choose a Nike ad for the sports site surfer is living in the last decade.
Barking Robot: News Flash: Teens Don't Give a Twit About Twitter
It seems that there is a consensus that teens do not twitter, preferring less public venues such as Facebook status updates and phone texting. See they do care about privacy – they dont intend to blast their info to complete strangers (followers) but rather just to all their pals or maybe their friends friends. Detail here:
