danah boyd writes eloquently about the slippery slope we are now headed down thanks to way Facebook is influencing the design of social software applications when it comes to privacy. She writes in here post entitled Facebook's "opt-out" precedent

I've been watching the public outcry over Facebook's Beacon (social ads) program with great interest…For all of the repentance by Facebook, what really bugs me is that this is the third time that Facebook has violated people's sense of privacy in a problematic way.

In each incident, Facebook pushed the boundaries of privacy a bit further and, when public outcry took place, retreated just a wee bit to make people feel more comfortable. In other words, this is "slippery slope" software development.

I kinda suspect that Facebook loses very little when there is public outrage. They gain a lot of free press and by taking a step back after taking 10 steps forward, they end up looking like the good guy, even when nine steps forward is still a dreadful end result. This is how "slippery slopes" work and why they are so effective in political circles. Most people will never realize how much of their data has been exposed to so many different companies and people. They will still believe that Facebook is far more private than other social network sites (even though this is patently untrue). And, unless there is a large lawsuit or new legislation introduced, I suspect that Facebook will continue to push the edges when it comes to user privacy.

Lots of companies are looking at Facebook's success and trying to figure out how to duplicate it. Bigger companies are watching to see what they can get away with so that they too can take that path.

I’ve stated before that one of my concerns about Beacon is that it legitimizes what is truly worrying behavior when it comes to companies respecting people’s privacy on the Web. As it stands now we have companies thinking it is OK to send out information about money you are loaning to your friend and that it is OK to violate federal legislation and share information about movies you have rented to watch in the privacy of your home without user consent.

This is an unprecedented degree of violation of the sanctity of the customer’s private Web experience. What I find sad is that not only are the technology unsavvy giving up their privacy on the Web in a way that they would never accept in meat space, but that even the technological savvy who know what is going on just assume it is par for the course. For example, see comments by John Dowdell of Adobe who implies that we were already led down this slippery slope by DoubleClick in the 90s and this is just the natural progression.

I actually worry less about Facebook and more about what happens when the Googles, DoubleClicks, Microsofts, and Yahoos of the world decide that “If Facebook can get away with it, we should do it too especially if we want to stay competitive”. In that world, your privacy and mine becomes collateral damage in the chase after the almighty dollar euro.

Now playing: Ashanti - Unfoolish (feat. Notorious B.I.G.)


 

Friday, 21 December 2007 20:42:06 (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Hi Dare, sorry I wasn't clear... the Facebook situation may not be novel, but that doesn't mean that the other forms of cross-site tracking are not similarly objectionable.

(My correction was about last month's tendency to blast Beacon as something unprecedented, instead of realizing that there are many, many beacons commonly accepted on Web 2.0 sites today. For my part, I've reluctantly started using ad-blocking software, specifically to manage and control cross-site beaconing.)

jd/adobe
Comments are closed.