Wising Up to Facebook
WHATS the difference, I asked a tech-writer friend, between the billionaire media mogul Mark Zuckerberg and the billionaire media mogul Rupert Murdoch?
When Rupert invades your privacy, my friend e-mailed back, its against the law. When Mark does, its the future.
There is truth in that riposte: we deplore the violations exposed in the phone-hacking scandal at Murdochs British tabloids, while we surrender our privacy on a far grander scale to Facebook and call it community. Our love of Facebook has been a submissive love.
But now, not so much. In recent weeks it seems the world has begun to turn a jaundiced eye on this global megaplatform. While that may not please Facebooks executives, it is a good thing for the rest of us and maybe for the future of social media, too.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/11/opinion/wising-up-to-facebook.html?hp
Atman
(31,464 posts)I never signed over shit to Murdoch. Murdoch was illegally hacking into people PRIVATE accounts.
Epic fail.
.
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)fujiyama
(15,185 posts)The comparison Keller makes is absolutely absurd.
Facebook's "privacy policy" or lack thereof is known to most people. The photos, the status messages, the wall posts, everything is their's. I've even heard of attractive people's photos used for advertising without their permission. Shady? Of course. Wrong? Definitely...
But it's a stretch comparing it to someone actually bugging your phone.
KurtNYC
(14,549 posts)hacked into phones to get the most private messages during the most stressful moments of their life and turn them into tabloid fodder.
As for permission to Zuck true but they keep changing their privacy policy and now will keep all your data forever, even after to you close your FB account. If FaceBook wanted to revoke all privacy settings and make every profile and post public they could do it.
onehandle
(51,122 posts)Google is embedding it's claws much deeper into the Internet.
Facebook is a lightweight, comparatively.
Skittles
(153,160 posts)I can't believe how many people have fallen for his shit
jeff47
(26,549 posts)The premise in this article is that NOW and a thief are exactly the same thing, because they spend my money. It completely ignores the voluntary nature of the former, and the involuntary nature of the latter.
Quantess
(27,630 posts)Unrec.
yurbud
(39,405 posts)to a coop.