Reality Check: Where Facebook went wrong on privacy

Editor’s Note: Welcome to our weekly Reality Check column. We’ve gathered a group of visionaries and veterans in the mobile industry to give their insights into the marketplace.
The topic of privacy and Facebook has been a hot one. Many individuals, including myself, are very active Facebook users (especially for Mobile Symmetry). Facebook has changed our culture, and generally that change has been for the better.
The topic of privacy is everywhere. Most of us skim over but do not read a particular organization’s “privacy policy” – we either a) expect institutions that have a privacy policy to respect our privacy, or b) simply don’t care about whether our privacy is protected. There’s also a generational element to privacy: it’s an intense and personal topic to many individuals over 35 (specifically, those of us who graduated from college before the proliferation of e-mail, mobile phones, the Internet, and yes – Facebook).
Enter the new Web generation. Led by “interface 2.0 experts,” they have developed the ability to pass information between on-line parties that relate data about their respective viewing audiences. For example, if the subject matter headline of my Gmail is “Need Android programmers,” within a few minutes there will likely be a banner ad for – you got it – software development companies that specialize in Android programming. They may even be more advanced and suggest Kansas City-based programmers. I personally don’t mind this targeted advertising, but it freaked out one of my Mobile Symmetry colleagues the first time he realized what was going on. (The reason why it doesn’t freak me out is that I rarely click on any banner ad – let alone ones that come from email subject matter inspection).
On top of behavioral target advertising, we can also notify others of our preferences through use of the “like” button on non-Facebook sites, thereby broadcasting our preferences to some, more than some, or all of the Internet. All this without a single keystroke. Go to enough sites, and hit enough “likes” and your audience has a pretty good idea of what you “like” today – and, most importantly, tomorrow. If told to my closest friends, no issues. If a specific buying behavior is aggregated for all of the 64113 zip code (we’re a very diverse bunch in Brookside), who cares? If it’s specifically about me, and it’s told to the entire world, however, without my approval, that’s where the line is crossed.
So where did Facebook go wrong? Here’s four thoughts:
1. They made consent an “opt out” feature. By changing the default to “opt out” and by having so many options, they created the impression that at any moment’s notice, they would open a valve and release more information until I turned the “opt” feature to “opt out.” Imagine if Verizon Wireless changed their policy on each and every phone call you made last month to “opt out” – even if they kept the information anonymous and aggregated by phone model and zip code, you’d be spooked. You may even want to be released of your early termination fee (which is now $350 for Verizon smartphones). This uncertainty breeds concern and anxiousness, not because of what is revealed, but because I was surprised that it had been revealed.
2. They made consent a complex “opt out” feature. A recent article in The New York Times on Facebook’s privacy policy describes it best: “To opt out of full disclosure of most information, it is necessary to click through more than 50 privacy buttons, which then require choosing among a total of more than 170 options.” It’s either a cruel joke (“you want opt-in – I’ll give you opt-in”) or it’s what happens when you forget to consider the user experience.
3. They made consent a complex “opt out” feature without my consent. They very nicely told me what they were doing but I had no choice – I had to do it or forego some of the benefits of Facebook. This happened with my hometown, my high school, and my college – they are no longer a part of my profile because I would not publish my profile information to the Manchester (Conn.), Governor Mifflin, and Davidson College sites. To use a Facebook term, this policy “poke” is inane and, quite frankly, heavy handed. It leads me to want to lie to Facebook, to say that I was born in Canada, went to school at Deerfield Academy, and to college at Notre Dame. Back to the phone analogies, what if I required the content all of your phone calls (and texts), personal or private, to be sent to your employer simply because they paid for (a portion of) your bill?
4. They made consent a complex “opt out” feature without my consent and without a hint of caution or conservatism. There’s a point in any product evolution discussion when you ask: “How can I make this more private and secure?” The closest thing I can compare this to in the business world is my accountant. I don’t expect him to be a complete Luddite, but I do expect him to have a cautious or conservative philosophy – to keep me out of trouble with investors and bondholders. Conservatism is a part of the code or the creed of accountants. It’s also an underlying assumption that some types of communication (although clearly not all)– is private and secure. Facebook should start with a cautious approach, and market the benefits of “living a little.”
Bottom line: The less cautious any social networking sites gets with their privacy policy, the less customers will engage, or worse, the more they will lie in their profiles. And a false or error-filled profile cannot be monetized for long.
Facebook has done a lot of good for our society. It has brought people together, and created communities that previously didn’t exist. The last thing it needs is a politically charged battle (which I believe it has already invited) with regulatory “one-upmanship” (Congressman Rick Boucher has already introduced a bill that has been deemed “too vague” by consumer advocates).
It’s time to right the ship and sail in a new direction – one that’s “opt in,” simple to understand, consenting, and cautious (yet changeable). Commerce can thrive in this new world, and so can Facebook.
Jim Patterson is CEO & co-founder of Mobile Symmetry, a start-up created for carriers to solve the problems of an increasingly mobile-only society. He was most recently President – Wholesale Services for Sprint and has a career that spans over eighteen years in telecom and technology. He welcomes your comments at jim@mobilesymmetry.com.