Posts Tagged ‘web is social’
relationship: my money and facebook »
Monday, February 16th, 2009
I wanted to title this, “why the stewards of data portability can’t be trusted” but nobody off my followers list would have read further.
I’m a binge/purge anti/pro-consumerist. I have two Facebook accounts. Both facts are perilously close to becoming problems. My lack of trust in others and knowing Facebook is a sham run by morons has me anxious.
I’ve slowed my financial flow. I’ve replaced much of my decayed savings in the last month or so and am attempting to be more frugal. (Somehow I’ve misplaced ≈$25 somewhere so I can’t claim I’m doing well.) Unfortunately, when it comes to personal data, I can’t do the same to protect my online persona.
Note for those with lives off the interweb:
There’s a set of folk who are flexing their keggels in wait for “data portability.” This basically means all your profile/personal data is open so it can be accessed from anywhere. (One profile, multiple sites. Fun, right?) Facebook Connect (with so much of this data) was the beacon of hope for the data-portables.
Without time to remove or edit current profiles, Facebook decided to change their Terms of Service so they have control of users’ data forever. (In my limited grasp of space-time continuums and Sci-Fi movies, that’s a long time.) Thus, they’ve proven they can’t be trusted. Again.
Facebook uses it’s ample user base within a corporate-control experiment in a desperate attempt to generate any revenue. Still, they’re a (or the) primary player and should be held to account. (Myspace, et al shouldn’t be trusted either.)
How Facebook could have better managed their manipulation (an incomplete list):
- Announce the change (people could reduce the amount of information on their profile)
- Provide the option to remove one’s data from pool (profile appears the same, data not sold)
- Change as an opt-in under the guise of providing better service
- Delete the data upon deletion of an account (their 150+ million users should provide sufficient data for sale).
These would have provided less data to start but would have let users grow comfortable with the idea.
One of the underlying goals of data portability is control, use of your data as you see fit. Facebook taking that control (essentially stealing your data indefinitely) is an affront to just that. For now, just like my dismal savings (and worse outlook), I can only omit (nights on the town = profile information).
Data portability could be a powerful tool for users and marketers alike (follow @alisamleo at Web is Social), but until we have control, it will remain a movement for cheerleaders on the fringe. Users’ common sense (read: fear) and corporate manipulation will continue to render it completely ineffective.
For those on Facebook or considering joining (who isn’t on it? I mean… really…), take note and watch what you’re putting into their systems. Your profile will outlive you.
Cross-posted at Sex Drugs and Intellectual Freedom.
Update: Some have said, in so many words, “who cares?” to the TOS change within Facebook. Understandable. My point was they’ve made another of many mistakes. Their failure to notify users, their post-wreckage band-aide post, their arrogant grab of content and their complete defiance of the data portability flag they’ve wrapped themselves in is what’s outrageous. Not them doing it in the first place.
From a company so melodramatically moronic, it should have been expected. Zuckerberg and Co. have essentially told us to chill out, that they won’t use our content how we wouldn’t want, and we should trust them. When someone asks me to trust them (especially after proving themselves untrustworthy), I don’t.
dog, the discount shopper »
Tuesday, November 25th, 2008
Monday, I mentioned the new JCPenney lame in Quick Thoughts (here comes the “more” even sooner than expected). If you didn’t watch the video there, watch below. It’s about five (long) minutes:
Men are fuckwads in need of women to scold them until they realize the awe inspiring power of giving them (discount) diamonds. Oh how stupid men are and how patient and nurturing women are. What a great world of redundant stereotypical this is. (Yawn.)
Marketing is desperate for something new because no one cares anymore. Sarcastic, absurd and subversive campaigns are all they’ve managed. Now, as @alisamleo says on The Web is Social, they have far more powerful tools and are still coming out with this lame. (Seems it should be easier to sell the world’s most prolific consumers more stuff.)
I’ve gone into the “diamond issue” before so I’ll just ask: are we, as consumers, supposed to be swayed by pathetic, sexist, buzz-word-marketing afterthoughts like this? If so, here’s how every marketing meeting from now ’til you’re dead will go down:
Boss: Our sales are knee-deep and the holiday season predictions are dismal. What do you have for me? Think out of the box people! Take it to another level.
Marketing manager: (Stands up, totally stoked to prove he’s on a new level) We’ve already started running with the concept. We have an incredibly long commercial because we aren’t constrained by television airtime. We’ll put it on a promotional microsite—my daughter loved Out-of-Your-League-Girl. It’ll go viral in no time. We’ve got great visuals and incessent, repetitive talking points to really drive it home.
Marketing underling: (Excitedly passes note that reads, “tell him about the [interactive feature]“)
Marketing manager: We’ve even got another section of the site that will display uploaded photos and SMS messages. It’ll be great for those users that fit easily into one-dimensional architypes.
Boss: (After making a series of checks onto his notepad list titled: “Buzz-isms”) Is it web 2.0? What about Facebook?
Marketing underling: I have a profile. We could…
Marketing manager: They have [Feature like Facebook Connect] now. We can add it to the site and have users add their contacts so we can then draw them to the site. It’s a call to action that will viral all over the outside of the box!Boss: Sounds incredible. Go with it. Keep it simple.
Marketing underling: We could use it to add social features and create an experience…
Boss: That’s not keeping it simple. You’ve lost me. Stick to the “add contacts” thing.
Marketing underling: … but how does that engage the audience, develop a relationship?
Boss, Marketing manager: (In unison) I don’t understand the question