I posted earlier this week (see Privacy, Social Media, Targeting and Marketing: Poked and Pwnd) about recent updates on privacy practices online. Noted was Facebook's announcement that users would be asked to update their settings to allow better and easier controls for users over their posted information. Facebook users were certainly asked yesterday to update their settings: but I had to blink twice. The update screen gave the choice (i) to keep the user's old, often customized settings (e.g. restricted to friends only and/or with other customizations for restricted access) or (ii) to allow viewers to access more information about the user than before (such as everyone, or friends of friends). Where the privacy controls had been "upgraded" was not clear to me. Furthermore, the Independent reports that some privacy advocates are criticizing Facebook for pushing users to expose even more of their information than ever before.

Slate today reports a further strange development: was it as a result of the privacy setting updates, or for some other reason, that Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg suddenly began sharing his entire profile? According to Gawker.com apparently including over 290 personal photos of Mr. Zuckerberg suddenly became viewable, and Gawker.com posted a selection of them in an online gallery.

In today's online version of the site's page A guide to privacy on Facebook, Facebook makes various recommendations to users about the level of their privacy settings. Curiously, rather than emphasizing the ability to tightly restrict viewing of their information, Facebook's recommendations include:

"We recommend Everyone be able to see information that will make it easier for friends to find, identify and learn about you. This includes basic information like your About Me description, Family and Relationships, Work and Education Info, and Website, as well as posts that you create, like photo albums and status updates."

Also:

"Some information is more personal, so we recommend Friends of Friends be able to see that type of info. This includes the settings for your Birthday, Religious and Political views, Hometown, and Photos and Videos of Me, which is all the photos and videos you've been tagged in."

Furthermore:

"We are committed to protecting minors who use Facebook. Until their eighteenth birthday, minors will have their information limited to Friends of Friends and Networks."

Although the page recommends that contact information be limited to viewing by Friends only, the page's recommendations to share more personal information with those who are not Friends, the defaults for minors being set to groups wider than Friends, and the recent settings update initiative, seems to conflict with the purpose of upgrading privacy settings to allow for better control, or restrictions, on what others can view. On one hand, Facebook can be lauded for giving the users many options to restrict closely the level of access to their information. On the other hand, it's not clear that the latest changes make users aware of this functionality, or make it easy for them to put these controls in place.

Jeanette practices in the areas of intellectual property, marketing/advertising, technology and entertainment law with the firm of Stohn Hay Cafazzo Dembroski Richmond LLP. Her practice has an emphasis on intellectual property acquisition and protection, film and television production, licensing, publishing, brand strategy and leveraging, advertising and marketing compliance and privacy issues.
[click on the author's name for more information]

up

3 Comments on “Part II: Privacy & Social Media: Poked & Pwned”

  1. Pamela Egan says:

    Personally, I've stopped worrying about my own privacy online. As a professional, you really have to choose between marketing yourself and maintaining your privacy. I obviously chose the former.

    I do worry about my kids, however. In particular, I worry that my daughter and sons may be putting too much information about themselves out there for the entire world to see. I suppose that's just being a mother, though…

  2. Privacy groups filed a complaint today with the FTC, saying the changes break privacy laws.

  3. Jeanette Lee says:

    Thanks, Omar. I saw that and posted about it today.
    Comments are appreciated! Keep them coming.

SlawTips      

SlawTips Cash Flow Reports – Part 1
Thursday, May 17

Following on our earlier Top 10 Financial Errors posts, this is the first in a series of 10 posts dealing with Cash Flow Reports and in particular, cash flow management.… »»

Practice

SlawTips Just the Facts
Wednesday, May 16

Today’s research tip is about facts. When research is assigned to juniors (and librarians for that matter) it is important to share facts that are critical to the research. It … »»

Research

SlawTips Minimize That Darn Office Ribbon for More Room on Your Desktop
Wednesday, May 16

If you are using Office 2007 or 2010, The Ribbon is now a part of your life. Some of you will be happy about this – some of you won’t.… »»

Technology

noted on Slaw    

MLB Selected Case Summaries    

These summaries of selected recent cases are provided each week to Slaw by Maritime Law Book.
More information.

  • Aliens - Exclusion and expulsion - Power to detain and deport - Minister’s certificate - Review - Evidence

    In 2002, Harkat was detained pursuant to a ministerial security certificate issued under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) as a person inadmissible to Canada on grounds ...

  • Contracts - Formation of contract - Signing - Electronic signature

    The plaintiff expressed an interest in purchasing the defendant’s (vendor’s) condo. The parties agreed to carry on their discussions through e-mail. Following an exchange of e-mails, the plaintiff claimed that the defendant was contractually bound to ...

  • Barristers and Solicitors - Relationship with client - Confidential communications - General

    The petitioner was a Receiver appointed in March 2009 by a California court over the assets of GJB Enterprises Inc. (a “Ponzi scheme”) and its principals, the Berkes (the GJB parties). The court ordered ...

  • Practice - Costs - Funding before judgment - When interim or advance costs available

    The plaintiffs were “direct to home” satellite based subscription program providers. Rex and other defendants offered “grey market” services to Canadian residents to facilitate the unauthorized reception in Canada of the plaintiffs’ ...

TalkLaw/ParLoi    

This is a listing of a few upcoming events in Canada of interest to lawyers, law students, legal librarians, and others involved in the practice of law.

Clicking on any event in the list below will give you access to more information and to links allowing you to see the full entry and to add the event to your own calendar.

Click this link for a fuller version of the TalkLaw/ParLoi calendar of events and for instructions as to how to add events and calendars to your own calendar.