Another Reason to Dump Facebook

[W_L]

Well you've obviously never had your identity stolen, wl. That will change your tune in a hurry.

 

Actually, I have that's why I spend $120 a year on an identity protection service before it happened. It is worth every penny.

 

As for sexual privacy, It's not really something most people care that much about either way, unless your roommate secretly wants to join in . If movie stars can be photographed secretly in intimate situations for years for the public eye, let's not kid ourselves that a double standard can exist for everyone else. People like to hear gossip, but they hate to hear themselves in that gossip. We went down the road of perdition long before Facebook was conceived.

[MikeL]

Facebook continues to get bad press. It's the Los Angeles Times again that points out how what you post on Facebook can be used against you. The latest article, Insurers are scouring social media for evidence of fraud, should give you reason to pause every time you post a comment, status update, or picture on your Facebook page and every time you click one of those ubiquitous "Like" buttons. If you are receiving long term disability benefits, don't post pictures of your latest skiing trip. Think twice before "liking" a cancer support group.

 

 

Now there's another reason to be careful about what you post on Facebook: Your insurance company may be watching.

 

Nathalie Blanchard found out the hard way.

 

Struggling with depression, the 30-year-old from Quebec, Canada, took a medical leave in early 2008 from her job as an IBM technician. Soon after, she began receiving monthly disability benefits from her insurer, Manulife Financial Corp.

 

A year later and without warning, the payments stopped.

 

A representative of the Toronto insurance company told Blanchard that Manulife used photos of her on Facebook — showing her frolicking at a beach and hanging out at a pub — to determine she was depression-free and able to work, said Tom Lavin, Blanchard's attorney.

 

"They just assumed from the pictures that she was a fraud," Lavin said,"without investigating further before terminating Nathalie's benefits."

 

 

Very few of us would consider perpetrating a fraud, but insurers can mine social media to find reasons for increasing premiums or denying claims.

 

I urge you to read the story.

 

If you haven't already, please vote in the poll at the top of this page.

[W_L]

This might get political once I post this news article on here, but I think people have been civil enough on this topic. I feel that the argument of privacy is very relevant to an issue in current events:

 

Shutting Down the Internet

 

Privacy concerns and fears of revolution brewing in their nation forced Egypt to turn off its internet as many of you have heard. In the US, we also have that idea floating around, proposed by Democrats and Republicans alike.

 

Let's take another look at what privacy means in context, it means the right to silence opposition without a single shot fired, it means rule by dictatorship without any formal recognition, and it means that every voice is silenced without appeal. That is the ultimate cost of privacy and the ultimate result is a closed society.

 

While many voted on this topic out of fear of losing internet privacy from news stories and popular fears, 80 million people have gotten "privacy", but at what cost to them and their nation?

 

It is the limitations on the social networking sites that we should fear, not their openness and ease of use. It is that openness that has kept governments more honest and, despite my loathing for them, it is the reason why populist groups in the US have gained so much power. Most people know I dislike the Tea Party movement as I am a classical conservative, but despite my political leanings, I would rather fight these groups in open debate than to eliminate them with a switch.

 

Here is the hidden threat despite your reservations about social networking sites, if we defend the notion of privacy to its very core, then what is truly being defended is despotism.

 

You might think, national matters don't really apply to how I live my life and how I keep my secrets.

 

Let's take a few steps: first let's remove the insurers and companies from viewing your profile legally. People cheer and politicians get political points. Then, let's say some kid gets killed by facebook teasing or something, okay make a law to allow banning of certain people from Facebook due to concerns for harassment. Sound great so far, right. After that a person complains that facebook and twitter are helping people to organize in violent mobs, okay let's make a law against organizing through facebook and twitter as it is not a 1st amendment right to do that online and it would reduce liability for the two organizations.

 

Each step of the way, people see nothing but good in their wake. However, look closer. removing insurers and marketers are great, but what about companies that recruit through sites as well. Not bad loss, right. Then Banning harmful people from Facebook sounds great, but the rules of banning people means any kind of offense could be used. No problem if a few people are banned incorrectly, right. Finally, you stop people from organizing in violent mobs,it sounds great in theory, but look deeper. Phonebooks are no longer useful in many areas as the internet has replaced the old phone tree system of organizing events. Without the ability to organize, many non-profits, business, educational, and civic events cannot occur. What you end up with is a society in lock down, not unlike that of Egypt.

 

It doesn't take much fear to create disaster.

[rustle]

I use FB often. It's reconnected me to people I hadn't seen for years, and enriches my social life, since I don't sit down with quill and ink pot any more, writing letters. Seeing targeted marketing is better than untargeted, and the network has to pay for itself somehow. BUT I don't waste time on the apps, and am selective about what I put out there. I don't care if I get junk mail, so my address is published, but my phone number isn't.

 

The entire internet is a public forum. Everything you do and everything you say/write is out there forever. If you're afraid of someone finding something out about your life, maybe you shouldn't be doing it, instead of worrying about hiding it. Or grow a thicker skin and live an authentic life, without any expectation of privacy, and just say, "So what?"

[Jon T Lappin]

I could really care less about Facebook and privacy issues. I'm just not worried that advertisers know I like Mt. Dew or that I watched a movie last night.

[MikeL]

Facebook continues to get bad press. I'm beginning to think the company really doesn't care about their 500 million members when it comes to milking personal information for more money. Now, every time you "like" something, all your "friends" will receive paid advertising from the "likeee". See the article Privacy advocates don't 'like' Facebook's ad plans from USA Today.

 

How it works: Facebook members who click the"like" button for a brand or check in at a store could find those actions appearing on their friends' pages as a "Sponsored Story" paid for by advertisers.

 

The promoted content will appear on the right side of a users' home page where events, questions, friends you may know and other content is located. There is no way for users to decline.

 

 

I urge you to read the story.

 

If you haven't already, please vote in the poll at the top of this page.

[Jon T Lappin]

Facebook continues to get bad press. I'm beginning to think the company really doesn't care about their 500 million members when it comes to milking personal information for more money. Now, every time you "like" something, all your "friends" will receive paid advertising from the "likeee". See the article Prvacy advocates don't 'like' Facebook's ad plans from USA Today.

 

 

 

I urge you to read the story.

 

If you haven't already, please vote in the poll at the top of this page.

 

I first became aware of the way Facebook eats information when I posted a status about wanting some Bacardi, and within a week I was being served ads about Bacardi. I tested the theory, and sure enough, almost everytime I mentioned a certain product by name, I would be served ads for it within a week.

 

Things like this and the ad plan quoted above do not bother me. I just don't care and I don't think the average person cares either. This is the reason that Facebook continues to engage in these practices. Most people don't care. I understand that there is a select group of people that worry about these things and are quite protective about their privacy regarding these matters. I just don't think most of them use Facebook to begin with. If a person is the type to worry about advertisers knowing that they like something, or what they use, they aren't likely to join a site like Facebook. It's a belief that permeates through everything they do, and I would think that it would keep them from using any public online forum.

 

That being said, contrary to what a lot of people think, things on the internet are not free to produce. GA, Facebook, Myspace... everything on the internet costs money to produce. Sites have to figure a way to support the costs of their site. All the big boys, like Facebook and Google, use user data to make money. It's why we all get to use these services for free. Unless some negative thing happens that I can't foresee, I have no problem with companies colecting data about me and serving relevant ads or selling the data to companies. It doesn't hurt me and it allows me to use all these great services that I wouldn't be able to afford if I had to pay for them.

[One Cheap Suit]

I don't have so much trouble with how sites track me and where I go online as much as I do with facebook's practices of hiding what they're tracking. Although I use an ad blocker and my real name and location aren't easy to locate without some pretty aggressive detective work. I use a proxy to browse the internet when appropriate and keep a clean browser history. I do have a facebook page but it's so locked down with browser add ons to suppress its activity that I doubt they're getting anything from me other than what links I'm clicking on facebook and nothing else.

 

I think that if a website wants my information so they can sell it to someone else, they should pay ME for it, not the other way around. It's MINE. So I advocate for a system where I get paid for visiting facebook.

[Jon T Lappin]

I don't have so much trouble with how sites track me and where I go online as much as I do with facebook's practices of hiding what they're tracking. Although I use an ad blocker and my real name and location aren't easy to locate without some pretty aggressive detective work. I use a proxy to browse the internet when appropriate and keep a clean browser history. I do have a facebook page but it's so locked down with browser add ons to suppress its activity that I doubt they're getting anything from me other than what links I'm clicking on facebook and nothing else.

 

I think that if a website wants my information so they can sell it to someone else, they should pay ME for it, not the other way around. It's MINE. So I advocate for a system where I get paid for visiting facebook.

Facebook is paying you for your information, by offering you their service for free.

[West Coast Dude]

Well, It is a frightening thought. However, I really don't mind who knows what about me. I am a completely open book. If people email me that I don't want to email me I can block them. If people telephone me when I don't want them telephoning me I can block the number. I can pretty much block annoying people anywhere and, lets face it as far as the authorities are concered they don't need to look at facebook to track you. If you use the internet, telephone, or any other mass media you're screwed. There is no such thing as privacy.

 

And the problem too is if you're out to some people on facebook and not out to some, and you're always worried some one's going to write something and then....BOOM OUTED FOR Life