The Beacon service allows website owners to "Enable your customers to share the actions they take on your website with their Facebook friends." By just adding a few lines of code to an e-commerce website, for example, purchase information from customers who are also Facebook users could be posted onto Facebook in a move deemed by MoveOn.org to be too much of a privacy invasion.
MoveOn.org's campaign (see it here) focuses on the privacy ramifications of Beacon. "When you buy a book or movie online -- or make a political contribution -- do you want that information automatically shared with the world on Facebook?" says the MoveOn.org website.
While an avid Facebook user, I have to say that I haven't personally encountered some of the embarrassing issues that the BusinessWeek article recounts. I did find on Facebook, though, that there is some type of privacy policy -- the type that MoveOn.org seems to be calling for.
It states: "When you send an action to Facebook, the user is immediately alerted of the story you wish to publish and will be alerted again when they sign into Facebook. The user can choose to opt out of the story in either instance, but the user doesn't need to take any action for the story to be published on Facebook." By making this service opt-in, rather than opt-out, it sounds like users would have greater control over their information.
It's an important story because of all the ramifications. Says BusinessWeek, "Any move that weakens Beacon's appeal to advertisers leaves Facebook under pressure to find other ways to lure marketers and justify the lofty $15 billion valuation bestowed by Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT) in October when it purchased a 5% stake for $240 million."
Zack Miller is the Managing Editor of IsraelNewsletter.com and a former equity analyst for a leading multinational hedge fund. He does not hold a position in MSFT.
U.S. Justice Department turns an eye on the telecoms
Serious Money: Three stocks that beat the market
Closing Bell: The wishy-washy return to Q3 (AA, DDUP, EMC, DNDN, CVX, FSLR, GS)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
11-29-2007 @ 2:56PM
Jeff said...
"By making this service opt-in, rather than opt-out, it sounds like users would have greater control over their information."
THIS SERVICE IS OPT-OUT, hence as quoted from Facebook "the user doesn't need to take any action for the story to be published on Facebook."
11-29-2007 @ 2:59PM
Zack Miller said...
Thanks for your comments, Jeff. I think we are saying the same thing. The service is opt-out which means that if the user does nothing, their info gets posted. Changing the status to opt-in and defaulting the user to not participate in the service unless he opts to would grant users more control over their privacy.
11-29-2007 @ 3:05PM
Jeff said...
oh ok.
I just linked up my blockbuster account to facebook yesterday, but given that you need to opt out of every selection, every time, I deleted the whole thing.