There’s a lot of chatter in the blogosphere about Nate Weiner’s recent experience with Facebook Beacon. Nate was playing the desktop tower defense game by Kongregate when the following alert box popped up on his screen:
I guess Nate has finally seen what Facebook Beacon is. While it was clearly stated a couple of days ago what Facebook Beacon is, people are just starting to interact with it. The real question is if Beacon will receive as much backlash as the newsfeed did when it was initially introduced. My bet is that it won’t initially, but the new service definitely has significant privacy implications. The concept that Facebook is tracking our actions across the web is a somewhat scary concept.
Let’s be honest though, Google is doing the same thing. In thinking about the new Facebook Beacon service I began wondering if Google is tracking what sites we visit via their adwords system. According to the Google privacy policy:
When you use Google services, our servers automatically record information that your browser sends whenever you visit a website. These server logs may include information such as your web request, Internet Protocol address, browser type, browser language, the date and time of your request and one or more cookies that may uniquely identify your browser.
The cookie technology that I previously suggested Facebook would eventually use appears to be something that Google is already using. Google is in the business of indexing as much information as humanly possible and you can bet that they are tracking where you are surfing. For those that have Gmail, Google Reader or any other Google service, you have to assume that Google is tracking information about each site that you visit that uses Google adwords for monetization purposes.
Given that Google is the industry standard for site monetization, you can bet that Google knows a lot about your site traffic patterns. While they might not attribute that traffic information to you personally (e.g. Nick O’Neill visits Feld Thoughts frequently), they do know what sites you frequent as a generic entity (e.g. user 933523435 visits The Webpreneur regularly). While this is not confirmed by Google, they have every right to do this under their privacy policy.
My point here is that this is not a new practice. What needs to happens is some sort of privacy bill or rights for internet users. Otherwise, large behemoths like Google (and eventually Facebook) can tell you to go use someone else’s services if you don’t want to be tracked. I would argue that it is a challenging task (if not impossible) to avoid interaction with Google while browsing the web. A similar situation may occur if Facebook’s growth stays constant. Do you think we should develop a privacy bill of rights for internet users?
![[Inside Social Apps 2012]](http://www.allfacebook.com/wordpress/wp-content/themes/allfacebook2/images/ISA2012_336x100_F_RegisterNow.gif)
![[AllFacebook Stats: Facebook Analytics for Your Business]](http://www.allfacebook.com/wordpress/wp-content/themes/allfacebook2/images/stpro_allfacebookstats.gif)
![[How can Facebook change your business?]](http://www.allfacebook.com/wordpress/wp-content/themes/allfacebook2/images/FMB_A_MAY2011_336x100_F.gif)
Never considered the Google/Adsense aspect. I agree with you completely. I don't think people realize what type of information is being saved about them. And honestly, how can you expect them to if they don't understand what happens behind the scenes of a website?
Comment by Nate Weiner — November 9, 2007 @ 6:58 am
Even worse, your ISP knows about every single site you visit, and they actively sell that information to web measurement companies like Quantcast.
Comment by Hashim Warren — November 9, 2007 @ 8:44 am
You're that this isn't a new practice, Facebook is just using it in a new (and more obvious) way. (Except it does remind me of the days when I'd see Amazon ads on other sites that would greet me by name.)Still, it's not hard to avoid – I've been blocking third-party cookies for several years, a common browser setting. Most modern browsers also allow URL-based content filtering, which can target services like Google AdSense. There are certainly ethical issues involved here, but options exist.In any case, I was a bit surprised by Nate's reaction: "Unfortunately, it’s being done in a ‘you can opt-out’ manner, when it should be ‘you can opt-in’." And why should Facebook offer you their service with zero compensation from you? I can understand people's reluctance about the new system, but at the same time, Facebook is a business and their service costs them money. They have to pay the bills somehow.
Comment by Joey Tyson — November 9, 2007 @ 10:39 am
Government will have to introduce some kinds of privacy regulations in general – these companies like Facebook and Google are gaining too much information on us – as does Microsoft.
Comment by FaceWeek.com — November 9, 2007 @ 11:11 am
You're that this isn't a new practice, Facebook is just using it in a new (and more obvious) way. (Except it does remind me of the days when I'd see Amazon ads on other sites that would greet me by name.)
Still, it's not hard to avoid – I've been blocking third-party cookies for several years, a common browser setting. Most modern browsers also allow URL-based content filtering, which can target services like Google AdSense. There are certainly ethical issues involved here, but options exist.
In any case, I was a bit surprised by Nate's reaction: "Unfortunately, it’s being done in a ‘you can opt-out’ manner, when it should be ‘you can opt-in’." And why should Facebook offer you their service with zero compensation from you? I can understand people's reluctance about the new system, but at the same time, Facebook is a business and their service costs them money. They have to pay the bills somehow.
Comment by Joey Tyson — November 9, 2007 @ 11:39 am
Never considered the Google/Adsense aspect. I agree with you completely. I don’t think people realize what type of information is being saved about them. And honestly, how can you expect them to if they don’t understand what happens behind the scenes of a website?
Comment by Nate Weiner — November 9, 2007 @ 10:58 am
Even worse, your ISP knows about every single site you visit, and they actively sell that information to web measurement companies like Quantcast.
Comment by Hashim Warren — November 9, 2007 @ 12:44 pm
Government will have to introduce some kinds of privacy regulations in general – these companies like Facebook and Google are gaining too much information on us – as does Microsoft.
Comment by FaceWeek.com — November 9, 2007 @ 2:11 pm
A few points:1. I think you mean AdSense, not AdWords.2. Users can opt-out of tracking through a combination of behavior (don't use Google, et al.) and technology (browser settings, plugins, anonymizers, etc.).3. To the extent that consumers want to avoid being tracked, there is a business opportunity for supplying such a service. But for it to become pervasive it will have to provide benefits that outweigh the personalization and targeting opportunities supplied by tracking.4. As I said in my last comment, users can easily opt-out of Beacons.What would a privacy bill of rights entail? Do you really think a political solution is a better tactic than a technical or behavioral solution?
Comment by Chris Kennedy — November 10, 2007 @ 6:56 pm
A few points:
1. I think you mean AdSense, not AdWords.
2. Users can opt-out of tracking through a combination of behavior (don't use Google, et al.) and technology (browser settings, plugins, anonymizers, etc.).
3. To the extent that consumers want to avoid being tracked, there is a business opportunity for supplying such a service. But for it to become pervasive it will have to provide benefits that outweigh the personalization and targeting opportunities supplied by tracking.
4. As I said in my last comment, users can easily opt-out of Beacons.
What would a privacy bill of rights entail? Do you really think a political solution is a better tactic than a technical or behavioral solution?
Comment by Chris Kennedy — November 10, 2007 @ 7:56 pm
The difference is that Google doesn't need an uproar to change its policies:http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/home-entertainment/g…..Notice that Google is doing a lot things that aren't in its best interest with that statement. It is going against the grain of what other businesses are doing. Facebook seems to go in the exact opposite direction.I think both sites pose privacy risks, but Facebook is a bigger threat because it has no other way to really make money, or continue existing. That makes it more desperate. That makes it more dangerous.
Comment by bernie — November 11, 2007 @ 9:29 pm
The difference is that Google doesn't need an uproar to change its policies:
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/home-entertainment/goo...
Notice that Google is doing a lot things that aren't in its best interest with that statement. It is going against the grain of what other businesses are doing. Facebook seems to go in the exact opposite direction.
I think both sites pose privacy risks, but Facebook is a bigger threat because it has no other way to really make money, or continue existing. That makes it more desperate. That makes it more dangerous.
Comment by bernie — November 11, 2007 @ 10:29 pm