
The response to the Top 10 Reasons You Should Quit Facebook was huge, although not without objections or doubts. Here are the some definitive answers from Dan Yoder that you should share on your Facebook walls… before disabling your account.
It’s no exaggeration to say I’ve been overwhelmed by the response to my post on why you should quit Facebook.
To those of you who shared your stories about leaving, or took the time to clarify some of the reasons for doing so, thank you. Apparently, I was hardly alone in making the decision to quit, or at least seriously considering it. It has been nothing short of inspiring to read your comments and realise how many of you cared enough to take action, whether it was actually deleting your account or simply taking the time to share your thoughts.
I thought I’d try to respond to some of the more common objections:
Tens of millions of people provided personal information to Facebook with the understanding that this information was being shared only within their social network. Then Facebook changed the rules and this information was unexpectedly shared with perfect strangers. That is, simply stated, a profound invasion of privacy. In the United States, the Fourth and Ninth Amendments to the Constitution, along with numerous landmark Supreme Court cases, have established privacy as a fundamental right.
Consider the example of the government tapping your phones. You conduct phone conversations thinking that they’re just between you and the person you’re speaking with. The government can’t tap your phone and listen in on the conversation without a warrant. This is because your privacy is a right protected by law.
Now take this example a step further, and suppose your mobile phone provider one day sends you an updated privacy policy that states that they can tap your phone any time they want. Would you still use their service? Of course not! And, in fact, they won’t do this because it’s actually against the law for them to do so. In other words, it’s such a big deal, we passed laws to prevent it from happening.
Social networks involve not only voice conversations, but images, video, links and text. Not only that, but there are frequently many recipients of this data. According to Facebook’s original privacy policy, these rich “conversations” were supposed to be private. Later, they changed their minds. This certainly breaks the spirit, if not the letter, of privacy laws, not only in the US, but all over the world.
I haven’t even touched on the various reasons people might want to keep these conversations private. They range from the profound, like avoiding workplace discrimination or protecting political dissidents, to the banal, like cheating on your wife or avoiding an abusive husband. But it really doesn’t matter. It is not for any of us to decide on behalf of someone else what information should be considered private.
Most people just want control over what they’re sharing and with whom. They have a right to make that choice. And many Facebook members did make that choice, only to find that, after the fact, Facebook made a different choice on their behalf. In the telecom industry, that’s illegal. Yet in the social networking space, where far more information is being shared, it’s not a big deal?
Just don’t share your personal information. Or, if you do, don’t use any applications and learn to use the privacy settings.
Maybe that works for you, you fabulous geek, you. But are all of your family and friends as clever as you are? What are the odds that the majority of Facebook members will do these things?
Uh, OK. Somewhere between not sharing personal information and actually using fake data, we cross a line into “what’s the point?”
That’s true. Of course, that’s true for any social network with a critical mass of people on it. But it’s a circular justification. Once people switch to another network, it’s useless for marketing.
This is a tough one. I wrote my original post for exactly this reason – to try and convince them to leave. I felt that by continuing to use Facebook, I was passively endorsing it.
I am not aware of any good solutions for privacy in social media. Facebook has expressly moved away from providing one. But there are plenty of good opt-out solutions. Twitter works fine for status updates. For photos, we’ve had Flickr for years. For video, YouTube. For link sharing, Digg. I’ve picked these because they are all independent companies, but there are dozens of solutions for sharing social media.
The nice thing about decentralising control over your data is that you aren’t at the mercy of any one company. In fact, you could make a pretty good argument that the web itself is the real social network.
If the allegations against Zuckerberg are “dated and unproven”, they’re irrelevant
I’m not trying Mr Zuckerberg in court, I’m selecting a service provider. The burden of proof is on Facebook here. If the head of a major bank is accused of embezzling or a teacher is accused of molesting a student, they’re usually summarily fired. They may have been entirely innocent, but the standard for holding a position of responsibility is much higher than that for simply not going to jail. Mr Zuckerberg has been accused of reading people’s private emails, and he runs a social networking company. Also, keep in mind, Facebook also settled out of court in a related case for a significant sum of money, lending some weight to the allegations. If Facebook and Mr Zuckerberg wanted to clearly establish their innocence, they could have chosen not to settle out of court.
Dan Yoder is a serial entrepreneur and the VP of Engineering at Border Stylo, a Hollywood-based social media startup. He can be reached on Twitter as @dyoder.
Disclosure by Dan Yoder: I’m the VP of Engineering for a Hollywood-based social media startup, BorderStylo. The opinions expressed here are purely my own and are not in any way endorsed by my employer. While I do not see our applications as directly competitive to Facebook, nor have I presented them as such, it would be disingenuous not to mention this.
Nicky
May 11, 2010 at 9:51 AM
i sent your earlier article to my friend, as well as telling her every chance i get that she needs to step away from FB and if she thinks her data is private she has sht for brains
she replied with “but it’s fun and if everyone else moves then i will too”
i seriously considered the friendship…how does one continue to respect someone they think is utterly and entirely idiotic!
Report PermalinkSam Brady
May 11, 2010 at 10:54 AM
I love this information. You should be careful not to be too one sided or opinionated though. Replies to your own questions like “Uh, OK…” skirt the issue and make it look like you might have a vendetta, rather than a logical viewpoint, which is not the case.
Report PermalinkOllie
May 11, 2010 at 12:37 PM
I stand by what I said, if you don’t think it should be shared then don’t put in on there. Facebook is fine for keeping tabs on friends and old school buddies.
Report PermalinkI think making informed decisions is the real key here, there are still ways for your stuff to remain “hidden” from searches. I think you’re sensationalising your own opinion here.
Wok
May 11, 2010 at 12:46 PM
People can link you to stuff you don’t want to be linked to though.
Report PermalinkKarakara
May 11, 2010 at 3:04 PM
If you’re talking about the tagging function, you can always untag yourself
Report PermalinkKelsey Brookes
May 11, 2010 at 5:38 PM
I realise that this is your personal opinion, but for it to truly gain traction, big web publishers like Gawker will need to stop facilitating sharing on FB.
I shared this on FB. ;)
Report PermalinkMatthew Rodgers
May 11, 2010 at 10:29 PM
i do love the fact that right below this comment box there is a “Publish this comment to Facebook” checkbox that is checked by default. Kind of seems a little hypocritical to post an article damning facebook and then strongly encourage people to publicly share their views on the very site that is supposed to be invading their privacy.
and just for the record, i don’t give a damn what facebook does with my information. There is basically nothing on there i wouldnt mind the whole world seeing. Most of my actual private information is already property of the public through the magic of reward cards/credit cards, competitions and the like, all of which have even looser privacy statements than Facebook; and companies behind them actively selling your information. In my opinion, privacy is an illusion, and has been for a long time, the corporate world knows everything about you and is using it to decide for you what you want everyday of your life.
Report PermalinkSteev
May 14, 2010 at 7:09 PM
What happens when you miss out on a job or promotion from something innocent posted on facebook that a potential employer didnt agree with?
Report PermalinkJames
May 12, 2010 at 5:25 PM
I couldn’t really give a shit about all this. I like FB as a tool to catch up with people I haven’t seen in years. I’ve got nothing to hide on there and I don’t post anything that should’nt be up there.
Report PermalinkTom
November 3, 2010 at 7:53 AM
I don’t like facebook trying to personalise the web. one thing thats cool about the web is that it can be mostly anonymous.
will be super annoying if the good stuff on the web requires a facebook logon. i guess then i will have to create a phoney fb account.
Report Permalink