Is Facebook, or its management, becoming the privacy risk?

I don’t know if you have seen it in the newspapers, but in recent days Facebook has found itself in an increasingly deepening hole on the issue of privacy.

This crisis started a few weeks ago when the site announced its “Instant Personalisation” and “social plug-in” features, otherwise known as Open Graph. The key issue was that it automatically opted in users to share data with select 3rd party websites to make their experience “a more sociable one”.

In response politicians, privacy advocates and the media are calling for Facebook to either change its attitudes to privacy or for users to deactivate their accounts. To back this up there has been the establishment of a “Quit Facebook” day, a site called Openbookwhich demonstrates some of the privacy issues, a new Facebook being established by New York University students, and even a grass-roots Internet effort that is asking users to avoid signing into Facebook for an entire day on June 6.

I like to gauge how relevant such an issue is by doing a quick audit of Google News and seeing what stories are out there. In the past 48 hours there were 85 news headlines when I search this topic. The results are below.

Out of the stories reviewed 21.2%discussed users leaving Facebook – they have got it wrong

15.3% advises on how to protect your privacy. They have got it right, but why ?

There is an old acronym in the IT game – GIGO – Garbage In Garbage Out – and I think it has some relevance to this debate. Subject to the terms and conditions of the site you choose to use (whether it be LinkedIn or Twitter or Facebook) what you decide to post on your network is what is going to be publicly available. This is because you have now entered the broadcast game – you are your own little newspaper or radio or TV station.

In short - Protecting privacy starts with the user and not the social network. As a user if you do not want information to be disseminated then either (a) do not post it or (b) learn how to keep it private.

So what is wrong with Facebook?

On February 26, 2009 Mark Zuckerberg wrote a blog called “Governing the Facebook Service in an Open and Transparent Way“. He cites in the post that the main goal at Facebook is to help make the world more open and transparent and that if they, Facebook, want to lead the world in this direction, then they must set the example by running their service that way.

He goes on to finish the article with the following quote;

History tells us that systems are most fairly governed when there is an open and transparent dialogue between the people who make decisions and those who are affected by them. We believe history will one day show that this principle holds true for companies as well, and we’re looking to moving in this direction with you.

With all of the concerns around privacy Zuckerberg should understand the importance of being open and transparent in relation to this dilemma.

He hasn’t, or if he has he isn’t showing it.

Weeks into the company’s biggest privacy issue to date, Facebook is relatively silent about making any changes to satisfy users or its critics. And rather than making an official statement, Zuckerberg got the company’s VP of Public Policy to do a one-on-one with the New York Times. 

If Facebook management are going to demonstrate an open and transparent governance it requires two things;

• a statement from Mark Zuckerberg himself being open about what realy the enhancements mean to users; and
• to address each of the privacy concerns one-by-one with a remdy that satisfy any cocnerns.

Only then will Zuckerberg demonstrate that his  company could be the one that provides that “systems are most fairly governed when there is an open and transparent dialogue between the people who make decisions and those who are affected by them“.

How Openbook and Diaspora will help Facebook

There have been two key websites that have become part of highlighting this debate. Some have suggested that they will be Facebook’s downfall

Openbook (see what happened when I typed “vomit” into the search field) is demonstrating what type of information is being made public via the new Facebook privacy settings.

You then have a group of students from New York University who have raised more than $120,000 from at least 3,000 contributors who want to back their project, Diaspora – A new ”decentralized” social network that actually gives each user control of his or her own information as well as control of if or how it will be shared.

Based on the founders’ core beliefs that you dont’ have to give up your privacy to remain connected, the open sourced social network not only tackles privacy but also the other largest complaints about Facebook -  customisation.

Will Openbook bring down Facebook? Will everyone quit Facebook on May 31? Will Diaspora be the new player that sends Facebook the way of Geocities?

The answer is a resounding NO !!

I sincerely hope that Diaspora and Openbook can (a) open users eyes to how they can better manage their privacy and (b) help motivate Facebook to improve how it handles users’ privacy.

Because this debate provides competition to Facebook on the most competitive playing field any social network can compete on – Privacy.