Dear Facebook, It’s not me, It’s you

I’ll go ahead and admit that I never “got” Facebook. I mean, I have an account, technically my second, but it largely languished, receiving snippets of content from my RSS and Twitter feeds. I never really cared if I was a ninja or a pirate, or for playing scrabble, or joining groups to show ironic allegiance to myriad infomercial products. But while I didn’t, numerous others did, causing the service to gain new users at upwards of a million people per week. I used to think that my issues with Facebook were my own, that was until recent events changed my mind. Beacon, deactivating instead of deleting, and now the ToS. Facebook just doesn’t seem to understand the internet.

An Honest Attempt

I first joined Facebook in 2005. I was going through my second attempt at college as an outsider in a school where everyone knew everyone else. The service, which was barely a year old, had already exploded across college campuses, with current and former students still being the only ones allowed to join and long before the dawn of the Facebook API. At the time, Facebook was simply a closed, visually generic version of MySpace. That every profile was the same seemed to force the ability to differentiate (the real use social networks isn’t to connect, but rather to stand out) not on horrendously designed profiles, but rather on the content in those profiles.

I was okay with that. I slowly started populating my Facebook profile. I searched for other friends be they online or off, and did what I could to connect with them. I uploaded a few photos of my apartment. I scribbled a few notes. And then I was done. I didn’t generate enough content to actually make going to the site worthwhile. The bulk of my good stuff ended up here, on my website. Or on Flickr. Or on another site that did the myriad little things that Facebook tried to do, but you know, did them well. So, for the first two years or so that I was on the site, my profile largely languished.

You'll use the internet his way

You'll use the internet his way

And then the news of Beacon hit

Despite the plethora of data that Facebook connects from users, Facebook still has no means of actually generating a profit. Yes, they do run advertisements, and yes, they can target exactly whom they show those adverts to by frighteningly precise demographics. But, this hasn’t helped them make anything close to a profit as Facebook has some of the lowest click-thru rates of any service on the internet.

In Zuckerberg’s attempt to milk his idea for a profit, he decided to team up with numerous online shops, turning purchases that users made into implied endorsements. To accomplish that, an item purchased from eBay would appear in a user’s feed with an implied endorsement.

Or Fandago. Or Travelocity. Or Blockbuster. Or numerous other services. The new advertising scheme was called “Beacon”.

The outrage was quick and deserved. Why? For a few reasons. One, Facebook didn’t notify users in a clear and timely manner that they were going to use this service. The service, which was launched in November of 2007, was suddenly broadcasting potential Christmas presents to friends and family on Facebook.

Second, Beacon was opt-out, not opt-in. This is a major no-no online, and something that the Facebook people should have perhaps realized. But, the arrogance of the service assumed that everyone would want this, in much the same manner as it assumed everyone would want to use the same generic profile.

And finally, Facebook committed the largest social faux pas of all, it lied about the service. Facebook gave misleading information about Beacon not only to partnering sites, but also news organizations.

But you can’t quit

I, like many other users, decided that this was enough. Even though Facebook backpedaled on Beacon rather quickly, they didn’t quite backpedal far enough. Yes, Facebook made Beacon opt-in, but they only made the publishing of results as optional. Whenever you made a purchase from any of their partner sites, Facebook still knew. And they likely still do. I decided to try and quit. At the time, Facebook wouldn’t actually let you quit the service. They would simply deactivate your account. Their logic was eventually, you’d want to come back, and when you did, all of your content should still be there.

From Facebook’s point of view it made sense. Why? Because their terms of service claimed full copyright over everything you submitted until you deleted your account. If you couldn’t delete your account, they were free to use all of your materials in any way they saw fit, forever. It was a win-win for Facebook.

The first blogging example of this hit the ‘sphere in July of 2007, causing a general uproar. So much of an uproar that the New York Times ran an article about it in February of 2008, right on the heels of the Beacon Fiasco. I know because I was one of the people trying to quit at the time. After the Times article, Facebook made it easier to leave.

A smarter return

Several months later, I was working on a startup idea and decided to try and use Facebook to try and give it legs. This time, however, I was determined to play things smarter. Because Facebook had engaged in dubious acts in the past, I used an email unassociated with any other online activity. I uploaded only a single photo, and didn’t give Facebook any original content. Just for fun, I would occasionally pump in gobs of bogus status updates to make myself a non-desirable marketing target. I was too vague, going in too many directions at once.

And so, my account largely languished, as I mentioned in the introduction. But, many of my friends and family and countless strangers saw the ease of centralization and filled up Facebook with blog posts, photos, and videos. At the time, they were rather safe in doing so. While your content was on Facebook, the service technically held total copyright control over them. But, you could regain control over your baby photos simply by deleting your content. A bit severe, but still a manageable out.

Fool me once

Or it was, until February 4th of this year, when Facebook plugged that out by removing a few lines from their Terms of Service statement, the binding legal contract that users agree to when they join, specifically the lines that say that deleting your work terminates their license to it. Furthermore, the termination section of that same statement now says that even if your account is removed, they still claim the same “irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, transferable, fully paid, worldwide license (with the right to sublicense)”.

Reality Check

For most people, this probably won’t be a deal breaker. For most people, allowing Facebook to use their photos in advertising is a rather fair trade off in exchange for free hosting. But for others, it’s it’s the end. For me, this is Facebook’s third strike. I’ve personally unhooked all of my info that fed into my account, removed Facebook Connect from the comments on this site, and took the Facebook app off of my phone. It’s not a breakup, it’s a starvation.

Yes, it seems that Facebook really doesn’t understand the Internet, at least not like I do. Users want empowerment, not enslavement. We want transparency, not obfuscation. After well more than a decade online, I realized it’s not me that doesn’t understand Facebook, it’s Facebook that doesn’t understand the Internet.

14 thoughts on “Dear Facebook, It’s not me, It’s you

  1. Well said. I encourage everybody I talk with to guard what they put anywhere online. Once it's on a server (even in a walled garden like FB), one must assume that it's available to anybody, anywhere, anytime.

    Lots of kids are going to face reputation management nightmares when they grow up and try to get jobs and their bosses or coworkers find the pictures of long-forgotten parties and other content that can be taken out of context.

    Personal responsibility and accountability are the recurring theme here.

  2. I hear you on that one. The WayBack Machine is going to bite a lot of people in the butt. My major issue comes not from people flaunting their privacy rights, but rather the terms of Facebook's new copyright claims. “Everything forever, and we can give it to whomever we want.”

    I'm waiting for some future model to have her private photos sold (because Facebook can do that) to another company. Or a future actor. Or presidential candidate. Forever is a long time.

  3. Good job removing the facebook connect from your blog, as you'll notice in the TOS they actually claim the right to any content that you: (ii) enable a user to Post, including by offering a Share Link on your website.

    As far as I can tell, this means they are claiming rights to anything with the share button, though a broad interpretation would be that they are claiming the entire internet, since by having a URL, you “enable a user to post” your content on facebook. Scary.

    I can't imagine this would hold up in court, but who needs the hassle?

  4. Especially since the user agreed to skip court and go straight to arbitration. I've worked with enough unions to know how much fun that is.

  5. You'd think after the fuss that was made over Beacon and Quitter-gate that Zuck and Co would have learned. Maybe the third time will be the charm. I'm hoping for an immediate backlash.

  6. Interesting that I cannot see a link to post this to FACEBOOK!!!!! I was so jazzed that I had just figured out this week how to link FB to my blog. Now I have to figure out how to undo it. Dang.

  7. Thats a very interesting article, and I for one will now be very careful about what I stick on there! I have since become very bored with the whole facebook concept, and got really annoyed at the constant stream of invites to add useless applications that I'd never use, and at the moment I only use facebook for one application!

  8. Yeah, apparently Facebook actually listened after the masses raised a stink. They're supposedly implementing some sort of User Bill of rights, too.

  9. I don't like facebook so much, I don't update photos anymore, but only really keep it to keep in touch with a few friends, whom aren't on myspace, great article, I dugg it and stuff

  10. I don't know if I'm going to be going back to Facebook myself. The domain name which I ran my email through expires in a few weeks and I have no actual content on there. I just think the guys at Facebook will continue to push the boundaries in the broadest terms possible ala Animal Farm.

    I'm just glad the news spread so quickly. Between this, and the uproar regarding the false Last.FM rumor, people are starting to show some serious concerns about data privacy online.

  11. I think this entry pretty much clinched it for me. I have pretty much the same history with Facebook that you do but it gives me the creeps. Not a whole lot does that these days.

    As I wrote in my last note – putting myself online isn't an issue but giving a company the copyright to my face is just downright weird.

  12. Disqus… Well Just wonder how we can combat spam ? I been using disqus for a while and was wondering is there a way to integrate recaptcha with it?