The Facebook Privacy Policy

The Facebook Privacy Policy aims to fulfill this requirement. It specifies Facebook as the entity
collecting the data, and does a good job of identifying which data will be collected in most cases,
including non-obvious data such as session data and IP addresses. Parts of the policy are vague,
however, and some are seemingly contradictory and confusing, such as “Facebook also collects
information about you from other sources, such as newspapers and instant messaging services.
This information is gathered regardless of your use of the Web Site. We use the information
about you that we have collected from other sources to supplement your profile unless you
specify in your privacy settings that you do not want this to be done.” This passage is either
inaccurate or outdated, as no setting related to this information is available in the “My Privacy”
feature.

Even though Facebook accurately addresses what information they will be including on the
whole, their Privacy Policy falls short in other areas. The identification of the uses to which the
data will be put are nonexistent, and the identification of the targets of potential disclosure is
anybody Facebook deems appropriate, including marketing partners. Facebook has close
relationships with several corporations, integrating their marketing efforts seamlessly into the
site via giving them special “Groups” for interested students. This disclosure is certainly legal, and
users are receiving the use of an extremely useful and popular site for free in exchange for it.
Unfortunately, not all users understand the terms of the bargain; our survey showed that 46% of
Facebook users believed that Facebook could not share their information with third parties.
(Jones & Soltren, 2005)

An Exploratory Study of a User’s Facebook Security and Privacy Settings

In a study at Ohio University, researchers discussed the privacy concerns outlined by several
reports and studies on Facebook. The study referenced a report on twenty- An Exploratory Study
of a User’s Facebook Security and Privacy Settings 16 three Internet service companies, charged
Facebook with severe privacy flaws, placing it in the second lowest category for a large, all-
inclusive privacy threat (Debatin, Lovejoy, Horn, and Hughes, 2009). Facebook tied with six other
companies. This rating was based on concerns with data mining, transfers to other companies,
and in particular Facebook’s questioning policy on how the company may collect information
about their websites users other sources, such as newspapers, blogs, instant messaging services,
or any external Facebook service (Debatin, Lovejoy, Horn, and Hughes, 2009).

Many of Facebook’s users say Facebook doesn’t address the core issues when it comes to a user’s
privacy. Consumer Reports stated “In the U.S., […] there are strong federal privacy laws covering
your financial and health data. But Americans have few federal rights to see and control much of
the information they share through social networks.” It’s important to question what data
Facebook keeps about its users (Consumer Reports, 2012).

Dr. Eben Moglen, a Columbia University law professor who favors dispersed data sharing which
is the practice of making research readily available to investigators. Dr. Moglen disagrees with
Facebook’s focus on privacy controls is “like a magician who waves a brightly colored
handkerchief in the right hand so that the left hand becomes invisible. From a consumer’s
viewpoint, Facebook’s fatal design error isn’t that Johnny can see Billy’s data. It’s that Facebook
has uncontrolled access to everybody’s data, regardless of the so-called privacy settings.” Users
are usually surprised where their information end up (Consumer Reports, 2012).

Social Networking and Online Privacy

There are a number of barriers to trust in the online environment. These barriers include
perceived risk, website design and content, the user themselves and privacy concerns. Privacy
concerns are considered the greatest barrier of them all because ‘the internet, by design, lacks
unifi ed provisions for identifying who communicates with whom; it lacks a well-designed identity
infrastructure’ (Leenes et al., 2008: 1). Privacy concerns include online information collection
techniques such as cookie technology involving extreme surveillance. The use and analysis of
data is also a concern due to unethical merging and data mining practices to profi le customers
(Tavani, 2011). The instant recording and permanence of activity, loss of control and ownership
of data also create barriers to online activity (Tavani, 2011). Overcoming privacy concerns online
is crucial in order for trust to develop, which in turn prompts online activity including purchases,
repeat purchases and positive word-of-mouth (Liu et al., 2005). Van Dyke et al. (2007) and
Metzger (2004) recognise high privacy concerns can affect trust levels online and in turn constrain
an individual’s willingness to transact or interact online. Liu et al. (2005) present a privacy–trust
behavioural intention model which depicts the importance of providing online users with control
(notice, access, choice and security) over their personal information to overcome privacy
concerns and enable trust to develop. Sheehan and Hoy (2000) re-emphasise the importance of
control to the concept of privacy by also highlighting a number of control factors likely to infl
uence an individual’s level of privacy concern. These factors include awareness of information
being collected, information usage, information sensitivity and familiarity with the entity
collecting the information.

Visibility and Privacy

The ever-growing features of social network sites have increased the level of privacy concerns
(Livingstone, 2008). Although it can be only eavesdropping as in physical life, social media
breaches can go as far as accessing personal information and finding ways of reaching it without
intention (e.g., someone using a third common connection in their Friends network to monitor
your profile). Therefore, the digital sphere has a great capacity for privacy intrusions on the
ground that digital content is persistent, systematically-recorded and archived, replicable,
searchable, and expressive of high visibility (Boyd & Marwick, 2011)

Visibility of personal information is involved in information disclosure practices, yet it is slightly

different than information disclosure. Visibility is a more broad term also containing the practices
of information disclosure. This thesis approaches visibility in the context of strategy. On that
matter, visibility strategies are also a kind of similar phenomenon slightly different from
disclosure. Visibility is the set of attempts of an individual to make itself visible. Visibility
strategies are composed of user practices regarding the conditions of extent personal
information becoming available for others to access.

Perception of Privacy on Facebook

Privacy is a very complex and contextual issue. From previous research and their own, Sheehan
and Hoy (2000) suggest five factors that influence the level of concern an online consumer feels
when divulging private information: Awareness of the information being collected, how the
information will be used, the information’s sensitivity, how familiar the consumer is with the
entity collecting the information, and what the consumer is receiving in exchange for their
personal information. All of these factors, plus the user’s relationship with the entity collecting
the information, may come into play when a user decides to reveal personal information on a
social networking site. Sheehan and Hoy’s study consisted of an email survey completed by 889
people who were chosen randomly from the Four11 Directory Service. The results indicated that
consumers were less concerned with their privacy when they were aware the online business
was collecting it, and when they felt they were in control of how the information would be used.
Also, the more the person trusted the entity collecting the information, and the greater the
compensation for providing information, the more likely the individual was to disclose personal
information. Applying this research to a social networking site is useful. Sheehan and Hoy’s study
would suggest that Facebook’s users would feel more comfortable disclosing information if they
trust Facebook to guard their information, if they felt they were getting a reward (such as free
use of the service), and if the users felt they were in control of how their information would be
used. It also suggests awareness of the kind of information being collected will play a major role
in how comfortable Facebook users are in sharing their personal information.
References:

Boyd, D. & Marwick, A. (2011). Social privacy in networked publics : Teens’ attitudes, practices,
and strategies. A Decade in Internet Time: Symposium on the Dynamics of the Internet
and Society, September 2011, 1–29. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.63.2.111

Consumer Reports Magazine. (June, 2012). Facebook and your privacy. Retrieved from
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine/2012/06/facebook-your
privacy/index.htm

Debatin, Bernhard., Jennette P. Lovejoy., Horn, Ann-Kathrin., and Hughes, Brittany N. (November
17, 2009). Facebook and Online Privacy: Attitudes, Behaviors, and Unintended
Consequences. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1083-
6101.2009.01494.x/full

Jones, H., & Soltren, J. (2005, December 05). Facebook: Threath to Privacy. Retrieved from
http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.805/student-papers/fall05-
papers/facebook.pdf

Leenes, R., Schallabock, J. and Hansen, M. (2008) PRIME White Paper, third and fi nal version,
PRIME (Privacy and Identity Management for Europe), available from: , accessed 21
January 2012.

Liu, C., Marchewka, J.T., Lu, J. and Yu, C.S. (2005) ‘Beyond Concern: A Privacy-TrustBehavioural
Model of Electronic Commerce’, Information and Management, 42, pp. 289–304.

Sheehan, K.B. and Hoy, M.G. (2000) ‘Dimensions of Privacy Concern among Online Consumers’,
Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 19, pp. 62–73.

Tavani, H.T. (2011) Ethics and Technology: Controversies, Questions and Strategies for Ethical
Computing, third edition, Hoboken, NJ: Wiley & Sons Inc.