Did Google Just Kill The Facebook Privacy Fiasco?

Mark Zuckerberg spent his 26th birthday doing something that may be looked back at as a significant milestone for the company: waiting out a Facebook privacy storm. In previous years, Mark Zuckerberg could have only wished for the privacy storms to pass over, as concessions were made as a result of each previous storm that passed through. This time though, an unlikely player may have just served as the victim in what has become a perfect media-fueled privacy storm: Google.

Google Takes The Fall

Just as the press was at the peak of its attack on Facebook for the company’s latest changes, Google has volunteered itself for becoming the face of technological privacy blunders. At the end of the week, the company admitted to collecting “payload data” from public WiFi networks through the company’s Street View cars. The company has now understandably come under attack for the move. It also couldn’t have been better timing for Mark Zuckerberg, who just the day before, had a quote from a soon-to-be-released book about Facebook published on the web:

Let me paint the two scenarios for you. They correspond to two companies in the Valley. It’s not completely this extreme, but they are on different sides of the spectrum. On the one hand you have Google, which primarily gets information by tracking stuff that’s going on. They call it crawling. They crawl the web and get information and bring it into their systems. They want to build maps, so they send around vans which literally go and take pictures of your home for their Street View system. And the way they collect and build profiles on people to do advertising is by tracking where you go on the Web, through cookies with DoubleClick and AdSense. That’s how they build a profile about what you’re interested in. Google is a great company, but you can see that taken to a logical extreme that’s a little scary.

Ironically, it was a direct attack on the exact program (Google Street View) that has become a source of privacy violations. It could not have been better timing. Mark Zuckerberg has essentially positioned Facebook as a better alternative to Google as the company doesn’t go about tracking people, instead they collect voluntarily shared data:

If you allow people to share what they want and give them good tools to control what they’re sharing, you can get even more information shared. [...] This is one of the most important problems for the next ten to twenty years. Given that the world is moving toward more sharing of information, making sure that it happens in a bottom-up way, with people inputting the information themselves and having control over how their information interacts with the system, as opposed to a centralized way, through it being tracked in some surveillance system.

The Lesser Of Two Evils

When contrasted with Google’s system, it’s appears to be a much better alternative. Despite some of the more complicated issues that Facebook is wrangling with (in trying to accelerate people’s willingness to share more information publicly), Facebook could actually come out as the victor, as it is perfectly contrasted to more aggressive (and questionable) tactics used by Google.

Honestly, it’s a dangerous game. Consumers should not be forced to choose between the lesser of two evils. However the media is only focused on what drives eyeballs and if the majority of consumers choose to view Facebook’s new privacy strategies as “last week’s news” (with the help of the media), the latest Facebook privacy storm may indeed come to pass.

In fact, some people are already convinced that this storm is going to pass over. They have ceded defeat on behalf of Facebook users and are ready to move on to the next story (Google is looking like a pretty good target). While I hope the press chooses to continue to force what is a much needed conversation surrounding the protection of users, Google may have just given Facebook their first opportunity ever to weather a privacy storm.

The evil Google icon was found via Merodeando.

Inside Social Apps 2012 is Less Than Two Weeks Away

Mediabistro Event

Inside Social Apps, held on February 8-9 in San Francisco, is less than two weeks away. This is the third conference on the future of monetization on social and mobile platforms. Leaders from the industry will share their views on today's most formidable challenges affecting social and mobile apps and games in 2012. Inside Social Apps conferences sell out in advance, so take advantage of early registration pricing. Early bird rates end on February 1, so register today.

1436724 Comments2010-05-15+18%3A53%3A40Nick+O%27Neill »

Two wrongs don't make a right.

Comment by MacSmiley — May 15, 2010 @ 10:58 am
As a non geeky facebook user, Reading the google blog post, I am afraid to say I am still choked about the facebook thing and I don't much care about the google thing. Yes they have driven by my house, and maybe this is going over my head, but are they releasing anything they found? Is it getting hacked? Did they get outed or are they releasing their blunder because they made one and just want to let us know?

Facebook playing bait and switch with my information over and over makes me MAD. Someone coming out and saying sorry we collected something we shouldn't have doesn't. Maybe Google has someone doing better PR, I will have to see what it actually means in terms I can understand to care.

What I do know is that right now, if i could find anything worthwhile to replace facebook I would be gone in a second, and google hasnt lost my faith in the least.

Comment by Facebook User — May 15, 2010 @ 11:07 am
Agree with MacSmiley. You can not compare these two privacy issues. Each one is different with different dynamics. To say that because of one Google privacy concerns, users will "give up" the fight for their privacy on Facebook is kind of ludicrous. That's like saying "This gut stole 500.00 but THIS guy over here stole 2000.00. Let's just forget about the first guy" Not gonna happen.

Comment by Facebook User — May 15, 2010 @ 11:12 am
I am more afraid of Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax (credit reporting agencies), than I am of Facebook's new view of privacy. You can be late on one electic bill and have to live with the concequences or many years.

My ideas about privacy have been evolving over the past few years. I no longer have a "business" profile and a "personal" profile it is just easier to be one single person in my social networks.

Comment by John Campbell — May 15, 2010 @ 11:14 am
Hadn't even heard of the Google thing. Facebook's missteps and privacy blunders mean a LOT more. That won't blow over. They are at serious risk of losing a lot of goodwill, if they don't make it easier to opt out of all that pervasive invasiveness …

Comment by T — May 15, 2010 @ 11:21 am
I agree with everyone so far. Google doesn't bother me at all. Sure, Google makes a very useful product by sending vans around to collect street view pictures. None of these pictures are associated with me. They are not pictures of "My House," linked to any sort of profile or online identity. If people have my address, they can just drive by my house themselves.

This is different from, say, somebody having my name and suddenly having access to a picture of me, a list of my friends, a list of my likes and interests, my location, my educational history, my employers. It's also different from, say, some company giving a free game to a friend of mine, and then suddenly having access to all of the information my friend has about me.

Furthermore, whenever Google has made a mistake with privacy issues, it has been upfront. It has apologized, carefully explained what happened (and went wrong), made simple options more visible, and made changes. Facebook is treating its own users as if they are lethargic technophobes who don't know what is best for them. It's disrespectful and alienating.

The last thing Facebook is doing is giving us "control over how [our] information interacts with the system." Facebook's approach is anything but "bottom up."

So, no. Google has not killed the Facebook privacy fiasco. Facebook is still very much in the midst of a crisis. And if it doesn't do something about the crisis, people will move on when a better alternative becomes available.

Comment by Dubious — May 15, 2010 @ 11:38 am
I'm sorry, but these two affairs are in no way comparable.

Google's issue was a mistake. Part of their Street View/Maps program is to locate and record areas which have public wi-fi access. As a byproduct of this program, their software may have intercepted a few snippets of info from some unsecured private networks.

This is very, very different to what's going on at Facebook, where your privacy is being deliberately downgraded as part of their effort to monetise the site.

In the process, Facebook users have been repeatedly lied to and patronised about the reasons for these downgrades, and it has become blindingly obvious after numerous such incidents that NOBODY at Facebook gives a damn about their users.

Actually, I take that back, they do care about their users, the problem is that we – you and me – are not their users. We're their product. I'd be willing to bet that they treat their actual userbase (the marketing and advertising companies to whom our data is being sold) with the utmost respect.

This post seems very disingenuous to me and I hope it's not a sign that Allfacebook is about to start going easy on FB.

Comment by A — May 15, 2010 @ 1:46 pm
I think the main difference between these gaffes is that, to an average user's mind, Facebook's is a more *personal* violation. It's difficult to consider Google's Street View collection-mistake as a goof that will affect one's own data, while there's no leap necessary to imagine Facebook's agenda-driven policy-tweaks as a violation of trust. I think that's because Google is considered a rock-solid public service–an institution, really–while Facebook is seen more as some sort of casual "home".

I could be wrong, of course, but I think that "betrayal" is something that Facebook-folks will feel more readily than Google-folks. Zuck covering up his willfull, sloppy moves with "See? Google's just as bad!" won't draw attention away from his mistake.

Come to think of it, it may be that Zuckerman's identity is what undoes him. I'm sure almost anyone who cares about internet privacy knows his name and face, while Google is known simply as Google, faceless and safe. It's ironic…don't ya think?

Comment by Ron — May 15, 2010 @ 2:06 pm
"Facebook is wrangling with (in trying to accelerate people’s willingness to share more information publicly)"

I think you are missing the point, Google HAS NOT just gone and changed the TOS so you have to opt out of everything, and made it very hard to do so. Hell they even hide how to delete a FB account, Google put it right in your face if you want to go down that path it's easy.

Comment by Stephen — May 15, 2010 @ 3:31 pm
Google pushes the limits by crawling for anything and everything that's for the most part publicly available.

Facebook pushes the limits by crawling for anything and everything that's for the most part personal and private but is being 'transitioned' to publicly available.

While both have significant privacy violation obstacles in front of them, Facebook has far more daunting obstacles to overcome, especially when it comes to branding, increasing overall company value, building consumer trust.

In other words, I disagree with your premise.

Comment by Deane Rimerman — May 15, 2010 @ 4:19 pm
Here's the difference: Google didn't make me a promise in their Terms of Service, and then turn around a change the rules when it was profitable for them to do so. It's a free country, and if someone wants to drive by my house and take a picture, or sample my WiFi signal, they're allowed to, and I don't have a problem with it. Further, I am *aware* that people have that right and capability, and if I wanted to, I could always plant large shrubs or something to obscure their view of my yard, encrypt my local network traffic, etcetera.

But with Facebook, I opted in to an agreement which they then decided to break. Worse, I have *no idea* what's possible for them to share or not, and with whom they plan to share it, because *they* control the software and the servers it runs on. There's no "privacy fence" or "hedge" I can build on their platform that they couldn't tear down at any time without me knowing it.

Comment by Jeremy — May 15, 2010 @ 4:56 pm
You must have read my mind ( or my post for Fast Company today LOL). I figure Google is far worse than Facebook.

Comment by Francine Hardaway — May 15, 2010 @ 5:01 pm
The issue here is not about equating Google's privacy blunder with Facebook's. The point is that Google's announcement has stolen the spotlight from FB, giving FB a chance to surface and get some air.

Comment by AJ — May 15, 2010 @ 6:22 pm
@Francine: And how do you figure?

Comment by Dubious — May 15, 2010 @ 7:24 pm
Zuckerberg privacy settings is a emotional and psychological intent to release to set fee the truth thatZuckerberg stole the idea for facebook

Comment by newbedave — May 15, 2010 @ 9:34 pm
It’s a free country, and if someone wants to drive by my house and take a picture, or sample my WiFi signal, they’re allowed to, and I don’t have a problem with it.

I believe that sampling of your WiFi data is a criminal offence if it was done intentionally. It would be the same as to say "it if a free country and if someone wants to penetrate to my house and sample my belongings and my money, they're allowed to, and I don't have a problem with it"

Comment by ditrich — May 15, 2010 @ 11:15 pm
Nice try Nick, but no… Google and Facebook are simply curators of our user-generated content. They are in both cases long-tail businesses caught by the fact that they can't attract 'head' level ad dollars. However desperately they attempt to create their own sense of 'ownership' around our content, either by stealing it or by stubborn ignorance, they will always be the 80% of the 80:20 rule and the 20% will be the talent and experience of traditional media converging online. Both Google and Facebook will ultimately play second fiddle to that and the sooner the better in my view. No elegant brand will want to go near to Google or Facebook as they increasingly become tarred with distrust. Brands will spend money in places where they find happy loyal brand advocates like Apple. Not in places where audiences are just inconvenient 'dumb f**cks' that are there to be manipulated…

Comment by Jan Simmonds — May 16, 2010 @ 1:11 am
gpl google premier league fpl facebook premier league tpl twitter premier league

Comment by Dev Ram — May 16, 2010 @ 4:02 am
I agree with everyone who commented that FaceBook's deeds are far worse than Google's.

It is a breach of trust to make once personal data public. We have no idea what has access to our data. To use an app you must give it access to your data without limits that you can see, and trust FB to be protecting you. I no longer have that trust.

I hope that someone out there is making a new social site that doesn't need to treat its users with disrespect, and I hope it is soon.

Comment by Chris — May 16, 2010 @ 5:00 am
Google and Facebook have two very different macro functions for their meta systems…with the same end result for themselves. To generate revenue through advertising. The comparison on these differences in mindshare is that google is universal while facebook is its own planet that requires membership.

People that live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Visitor tracking is ongoing for both facebook and google. You need to track your visitors on an objective level to improve your product to deliver better quality and targeted applications for your end users…at the same time both parties deliver ads that can be targeted by the publisher to the type of invidual who should see the ad based on age, sex etc..

Comment by Rob Balla — May 16, 2010 @ 5:48 am
The tone of this article sounds like someone from Facebook paid someone to it. Facebook, give me my privacy and data back. There are ways to block doubleclick cookies and I have been for years (even before google bought them) because I don't feel comfortable with tracking cookies. I use spybot to see which domains are setting cookies on my computer and then add an entry in my hosts file so that no requests to that domain ever leave my computer. Facebook just made your friends list, profile photo, city, work information and interests public to the web which basically means Google!

Comment by Cristea — May 16, 2010 @ 6:05 am
Google could have deleted the data and never said a word.

Just like Facebook enables features we never ask for eventhough they spread info we do not choose to spread.

Instead they admitted collecting what anyone with a HINT of knowledge about these things knows to be useless.

The Google Car drives past these houses, in the time it´s within range it picks up data, and while doing this it even shifts frequency. So the data it picks up is fragments. And it´s done during a extremely short timeframe.

Now we are left with 600GB data, that can be considered random data. Lets data mine that and find something usefull?

Compare that to Facebook that has a "opt out" button that does not work. Compare that to Facebook that has a finely weaved net of who you talk to, with real mail adresses, names, phones, pictures and video.

Facebook has us by the balls, Google can at most grab our ass.

Comment by Peter — May 16, 2010 @ 7:38 am
Guys…it's like going out in a public place, taking off your clothes and complaining because people see what you're doing. Facebook is a free service…it costs us NOTHING…get it? Now, if there were premium options, I would expect more from FB. You're on the internet, sharing with friends from pubs and coffee shops and it's free!

Have we become such princesses that we want our stuff free, and also by the way, limit the companies providing these free services to make the revenue they desire.

The days of privacy are gone my friends, so be careful what you put out there…we created this beast, and we feed it every day… We just need to get over ourselves and grow up…

Comment by tzugidan — May 17, 2010 @ 6:21 am
I've had enough and moved my stuff over to http://www.folkdirect.com – seems cool so far and the main thing is they have built it from the ground up with privacy at the top of the agenda. Good functionality.

Comment by darkgrand — May 17, 2010 @ 1:35 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Two wrongs don't make a right.

Comment by MacSmiley — May 15, 2010 @ 10:58 am

As a non geeky facebook user, Reading the google blog post, I am afraid to say I am still choked about the facebook thing and I don't much care about the google thing. Yes they have driven by my house, and maybe this is going over my head, but are they releasing anything they found? Is it getting hacked? Did they get outed or are they releasing their blunder because they made one and just want to let us know?

Facebook playing bait and switch with my information over and over makes me MAD. Someone coming out and saying sorry we collected something we shouldn't have doesn't. Maybe Google has someone doing better PR, I will have to see what it actually means in terms I can understand to care.

What I do know is that right now, if i could find anything worthwhile to replace facebook I would be gone in a second, and google hasnt lost my faith in the least.

Comment by Facebook User — May 15, 2010 @ 11:07 am

Agree with MacSmiley. You can not compare these two privacy issues. Each one is different with different dynamics. To say that because of one Google privacy concerns, users will "give up" the fight for their privacy on Facebook is kind of ludicrous. That's like saying "This gut stole 500.00 but THIS guy over here stole 2000.00. Let's just forget about the first guy" Not gonna happen.

Comment by Facebook User — May 15, 2010 @ 11:12 am

I am more afraid of Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax (credit reporting agencies), than I am of Facebook's new view of privacy. You can be late on one electic bill and have to live with the concequences or many years.

My ideas about privacy have been evolving over the past few years. I no longer have a "business" profile and a "personal" profile it is just easier to be one single person in my social networks.

Comment by John Campbell — May 15, 2010 @ 11:14 am

Hadn't even heard of the Google thing. Facebook's missteps and privacy blunders mean a LOT more. That won't blow over. They are at serious risk of losing a lot of goodwill, if they don't make it easier to opt out of all that pervasive invasiveness …

Comment by T — May 15, 2010 @ 11:21 am

I agree with everyone so far. Google doesn't bother me at all. Sure, Google makes a very useful product by sending vans around to collect street view pictures. None of these pictures are associated with me. They are not pictures of "My House," linked to any sort of profile or online identity. If people have my address, they can just drive by my house themselves.

This is different from, say, somebody having my name and suddenly having access to a picture of me, a list of my friends, a list of my likes and interests, my location, my educational history, my employers. It's also different from, say, some company giving a free game to a friend of mine, and then suddenly having access to all of the information my friend has about me.

Furthermore, whenever Google has made a mistake with privacy issues, it has been upfront. It has apologized, carefully explained what happened (and went wrong), made simple options more visible, and made changes. Facebook is treating its own users as if they are lethargic technophobes who don't know what is best for them. It's disrespectful and alienating.

The last thing Facebook is doing is giving us "control over how [our] information interacts with the system." Facebook's approach is anything but "bottom up."

So, no. Google has not killed the Facebook privacy fiasco. Facebook is still very much in the midst of a crisis. And if it doesn't do something about the crisis, people will move on when a better alternative becomes available.

Comment by Dubious — May 15, 2010 @ 11:38 am

I'm sorry, but these two affairs are in no way comparable.

Google's issue was a mistake. Part of their Street View/Maps program is to locate and record areas which have public wi-fi access. As a byproduct of this program, their software may have intercepted a few snippets of info from some unsecured private networks.

This is very, very different to what's going on at Facebook, where your privacy is being deliberately downgraded as part of their effort to monetise the site.

In the process, Facebook users have been repeatedly lied to and patronised about the reasons for these downgrades, and it has become blindingly obvious after numerous such incidents that NOBODY at Facebook gives a damn about their users.

Actually, I take that back, they do care about their users, the problem is that we – you and me – are not their users. We're their product. I'd be willing to bet that they treat their actual userbase (the marketing and advertising companies to whom our data is being sold) with the utmost respect.

This post seems very disingenuous to me and I hope it's not a sign that Allfacebook is about to start going easy on FB.

Comment by A — May 15, 2010 @ 1:46 pm

I think the main difference between these gaffes is that, to an average user's mind, Facebook's is a more *personal* violation. It's difficult to consider Google's Street View collection-mistake as a goof that will affect one's own data, while there's no leap necessary to imagine Facebook's agenda-driven policy-tweaks as a violation of trust. I think that's because Google is considered a rock-solid public service–an institution, really–while Facebook is seen more as some sort of casual "home".

I could be wrong, of course, but I think that "betrayal" is something that Facebook-folks will feel more readily than Google-folks. Zuck covering up his willfull, sloppy moves with "See? Google's just as bad!" won't draw attention away from his mistake.

Come to think of it, it may be that Zuckerman's identity is what undoes him. I'm sure almost anyone who cares about internet privacy knows his name and face, while Google is known simply as Google, faceless and safe. It's ironic…don't ya think?

Comment by Ron — May 15, 2010 @ 2:06 pm

"Facebook is wrangling with (in trying to accelerate people’s willingness to share more information publicly)"

I think you are missing the point, Google HAS NOT just gone and changed the TOS so you have to opt out of everything, and made it very hard to do so. Hell they even hide how to delete a FB account, Google put it right in your face if you want to go down that path it's easy.

Comment by Stephen — May 15, 2010 @ 3:31 pm

Google pushes the limits by crawling for anything and everything that's for the most part publicly available.

Facebook pushes the limits by crawling for anything and everything that's for the most part personal and private but is being 'transitioned' to publicly available.

While both have significant privacy violation obstacles in front of them, Facebook has far more daunting obstacles to overcome, especially when it comes to branding, increasing overall company value, building consumer trust.

In other words, I disagree with your premise.

Comment by Deane Rimerman — May 15, 2010 @ 4:19 pm

Here's the difference: Google didn't make me a promise in their Terms of Service, and then turn around a change the rules when it was profitable for them to do so. It's a free country, and if someone wants to drive by my house and take a picture, or sample my WiFi signal, they're allowed to, and I don't have a problem with it. Further, I am *aware* that people have that right and capability, and if I wanted to, I could always plant large shrubs or something to obscure their view of my yard, encrypt my local network traffic, etcetera.

But with Facebook, I opted in to an agreement which they then decided to break. Worse, I have *no idea* what's possible for them to share or not, and with whom they plan to share it, because *they* control the software and the servers it runs on. There's no "privacy fence" or "hedge" I can build on their platform that they couldn't tear down at any time without me knowing it.

Comment by Jeremy — May 15, 2010 @ 4:56 pm

You must have read my mind ( or my post for Fast Company today LOL). I figure Google is far worse than Facebook.

Comment by Francine Hardaway — May 15, 2010 @ 5:01 pm

The issue here is not about equating Google's privacy blunder with Facebook's. The point is that Google's announcement has stolen the spotlight from FB, giving FB a chance to surface and get some air.

Comment by AJ — May 15, 2010 @ 6:22 pm

@Francine: And how do you figure?

Comment by Dubious — May 15, 2010 @ 7:24 pm

Zuckerberg privacy settings is a emotional and psychological intent to release to set fee the truth thatZuckerberg stole the idea for facebook

Comment by newbedave — May 15, 2010 @ 9:34 pm

It’s a free country, and if someone wants to drive by my house and take a picture, or sample my WiFi signal, they’re allowed to, and I don’t have a problem with it.

I believe that sampling of your WiFi data is a criminal offence if it was done intentionally. It would be the same as to say "it if a free country and if someone wants to penetrate to my house and sample my belongings and my money, they're allowed to, and I don't have a problem with it"

Comment by ditrich — May 15, 2010 @ 11:15 pm

Nice try Nick, but no… Google and Facebook are simply curators of our user-generated content. They are in both cases long-tail businesses caught by the fact that they can't attract 'head' level ad dollars. However desperately they attempt to create their own sense of 'ownership' around our content, either by stealing it or by stubborn ignorance, they will always be the 80% of the 80:20 rule and the 20% will be the talent and experience of traditional media converging online. Both Google and Facebook will ultimately play second fiddle to that and the sooner the better in my view. No elegant brand will want to go near to Google or Facebook as they increasingly become tarred with distrust. Brands will spend money in places where they find happy loyal brand advocates like Apple. Not in places where audiences are just inconvenient 'dumb f**cks' that are there to be manipulated…

Comment by Jan Simmonds — May 16, 2010 @ 1:11 am

gpl google premier league fpl facebook premier league tpl twitter premier league

Comment by Dev Ram — May 16, 2010 @ 4:02 am

I agree with everyone who commented that FaceBook's deeds are far worse than Google's.

It is a breach of trust to make once personal data public. We have no idea what has access to our data. To use an app you must give it access to your data without limits that you can see, and trust FB to be protecting you. I no longer have that trust.

I hope that someone out there is making a new social site that doesn't need to treat its users with disrespect, and I hope it is soon.

Comment by Chris — May 16, 2010 @ 5:00 am

Google and Facebook have two very different macro functions for their meta systems…with the same end result for themselves. To generate revenue through advertising. The comparison on these differences in mindshare is that google is universal while facebook is its own planet that requires membership.

People that live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Visitor tracking is ongoing for both facebook and google. You need to track your visitors on an objective level to improve your product to deliver better quality and targeted applications for your end users…at the same time both parties deliver ads that can be targeted by the publisher to the type of invidual who should see the ad based on age, sex etc..

Comment by Rob Balla — May 16, 2010 @ 5:48 am

The tone of this article sounds like someone from Facebook paid someone to it. Facebook, give me my privacy and data back. There are ways to block doubleclick cookies and I have been for years (even before google bought them) because I don't feel comfortable with tracking cookies. I use spybot to see which domains are setting cookies on my computer and then add an entry in my hosts file so that no requests to that domain ever leave my computer. Facebook just made your friends list, profile photo, city, work information and interests public to the web which basically means Google!

Comment by Cristea — May 16, 2010 @ 6:05 am

Google could have deleted the data and never said a word.

Just like Facebook enables features we never ask for eventhough they spread info we do not choose to spread.

Instead they admitted collecting what anyone with a HINT of knowledge about these things knows to be useless.

The Google Car drives past these houses, in the time it´s within range it picks up data, and while doing this it even shifts frequency. So the data it picks up is fragments. And it´s done during a extremely short timeframe.

Now we are left with 600GB data, that can be considered random data. Lets data mine that and find something usefull?

Compare that to Facebook that has a "opt out" button that does not work. Compare that to Facebook that has a finely weaved net of who you talk to, with real mail adresses, names, phones, pictures and video.

Facebook has us by the balls, Google can at most grab our ass.

Comment by Peter — May 16, 2010 @ 7:38 am

Guys…it's like going out in a public place, taking off your clothes and complaining because people see what you're doing. Facebook is a free service…it costs us NOTHING…get it? Now, if there were premium options, I would expect more from FB. You're on the internet, sharing with friends from pubs and coffee shops and it's free!

Have we become such princesses that we want our stuff free, and also by the way, limit the companies providing these free services to make the revenue they desire.

The days of privacy are gone my friends, so be careful what you put out there…we created this beast, and we feed it every day… We just need to get over ourselves and grow up…

Comment by tzugidan — May 17, 2010 @ 6:21 am

I've had enough and moved my stuff over to http://www.folkdirect.com – seems cool so far and the main thing is they have built it from the ground up with privacy at the top of the agenda. Good functionality.

Comment by darkgrand — May 17, 2010 @ 1:35 pm

Did Google Just Kill The Facebook Privacy Fiasco?

Google Takes The Fall

The Lesser Of Two Evils

Recommended Articles

Inside Social Apps 2012 is Less Than Two Weeks Away

1436724 Comments2010-05-15+18%3A53%3A40Nick+O%27Neill »

Leave a comment

Follow AllFacebook

Send us a Tip

Social Media Jobs

Let your next job find you!

Featured Company

Jobs of the Day

3D Artist

Healthcare Editor

UX Artist

See all jobs

Upcoming Events

Did Google Just Kill The Facebook Privacy Fiasco?

Google Takes The Fall

The Lesser Of Two Evils

Recommended Articles

Inside Social Apps 2012 is Less Than Two Weeks Away

1436724 Commentshttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.allfacebook.com%2Fdid-google-just-kill-the-facebook-privacy-fiasco-2010-05Did+Google+Just+Kill+The+Facebook+Privacy+Fiasco%3F2010-05-15+18%3A53%3A40Nick+O%27Neillhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.allfacebook.com%2F%3Fp%3D14367 »

Leave a comment

Follow AllFacebook

Send us a Tip

Social Media Jobs

Let your next job find you!

Featured Company

Jobs of the Day

3D Artist

Healthcare Editor

UX Artist

See all jobs

Upcoming Events

1436724 Comments2010-05-15+18%3A53%3A40Nick+O%27Neill »