Showing posts with label privacy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label privacy. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Facebook and Privacy: what to make of it?

Post-Note: 3/2/09. I've heard that the new TOS's have been changed/removed.

I have some friends who keep talking up Facebook with me. The biggest reason for some is the increased ability (vs. Myspace) to enact privacy filters to control who can or cannot access one's account information. 

Facebook is making a splash about this, using sparklines to help users set the exact privacy level they require. A brief article on Mashable gives more detail. 

However, this 2/16/09 Mashable article brings some scary news. Facebook has changed its Terms of Service (TOS) so that now everything you ever write, upload, comment on, etc. belongs to Facebook in perpetuity, regardless of whether you leave Facebook at a later date.

That means words, pictures... whatever.

It's a little unnerving to think that while millions of people are using Facebook to connect with old friends, Facebook is taking ownership of their every word, photo or suggestion for improvement. The TOS are new, and retroactive.

It's not that I think that Facebook is part of some nefarious plot to undermine copyright and artistic control. No, it's not like that at all. It's simply that I think the Internet and social networks are pushing copyright and ownership issues so far past our laws that we are entering a land of remarkable unknowns. There are nothing but questions here... and, of course, lawyers.

Pic Info: "Facebook Knows What You Did Last Summer," From Flickr CC

Friday, March 28, 2008

Thing 20 - MySpace & Facebook

Sometimes I think of MySpace and Facebook as black holes... I go near them and all sense of time and place is forgotten...

I haven't actually spent that much time on them. Don't have pages of my own and have zero inclination to start one, but I'm just totally fascinated by them all the same. It's the whole idea of "social networking" and how these sites are creating a paradigm shift in our definitions and perceptions of privacy, identity, place, community, association... even the definition of "friend" has undergone this strange transmutation. It's fascinating and perplexing.

In my professional capacity, I think of MySpace in two primary ways: first, to protect kids' right to go online and connect with their friends (however they define "friend.") Second, to learn as much as possible about these venues so that I can talk coherently with the parents who come in to the library and are concerned about their kids going online and therefore being exposed to the evils that may lurk in cyberspace. For them, I want to know enough about MySpace to be able to sit them down at the computer and give them tips on how to explore it as well as being able to suggest books that might help them parent in this new frontier.

I watched a PBS Frontline episode called Growing Up Online. It's available for viewing online, and I would highly recommend it to parents/teachers/library staff and other concerned folk. The program covers a lot of ground, from kids spending so much time online that they have more of a virtual life than a real one, to cyber-stalking and cyber-bullying.

I was struck by one of the parents in the program, a New Jersey mom who was incredibly concerned about some "bad man" stalking her daughters online. I don't want to minimize this concern in any way, but how is this worse than the greasy, doorway perverts who we grew up learning to avoid? (One note from the Frontline episode: the reporter said that in every case where a teen was stalked online the teen had been an active participant, at least initially... It stands to reason that it's much easier to block an inappropriate advance online than face to face with a real person.)

I think one thing that will be very interesting to watch unfold is what these online networking sites will mean for our evolving definitions of privacy. The little time I've spent bouncing around on MySpace shows me that people put the most unbelievably private info out there. And I'm not talking sexual things. I'm talking about cell phone numbers, place of birth, age, full name, etc. Everything but the social security number. (This while we hear more and more about identity thieves creating endless havoc for their victims.)

This should matter to us as library professionals because we (should) put a great deal of care and thought into issues around protecting privacy, not to mention media literacy, copyrights, etc. What does that mean for us as professionals to be zealously guarding patrons' privacy, then watch them put their entire life up on MySpace? I'm guessing that we haven't even begun to imagine how this will play out.

Then there is the whole issue of our privacy. We are out there in the public eye, and I have no doubt that there have already been several occasions, whether it be bored teens or bitter patrons, where individual staff get Googled. Not a bad thing if you lead a stereotypical librarian's life. But what if you don't? Is it safe to be Out in your blog if you identify where you work (okay, that might fit a certain librarian stereotype, still, I think you can get my point)? Then there's a whole gamut of choices and behaviors that fall into the category of "questionable taste." You have to wonder how many ways it could come back to haunt people. We all did stupid stuff as kids. Many of us do dumb things as grown-ups. But hopefully by now only a few people remember, and we can count on memories to fade and fugue with time, details to blur. The nature of people's memories allows a lot of room for compassion and forgiveness.

But when it's sent out to the Internet... it's really there. Forever. Any anyone can access it. The new NEA Today came today, and in it is an article called "The Whole World (wide web) Is Watching." The article gives several examples of teachers who were fired because their students or administrators discovered "inappropriate" content on their MySpace pages. In every case cited, the teachers had sexually explicit content on their pages. None of the examples involved interaction with students or minors. So the teachers were not blogging about things that were technically illegal. Still, they were fired.

The article goes on to say:

But what about free speech? Don't school employees have the right, on their own time, to blog about their private lives without fear of losing their jobs? Probably not... It's the general rule that school employees can be disciplined for off-duty conduct if the school district can show that the conduct had an adverse impact on the school or the teacher's ability to teach.


The article ends with the comment:

There's an old lawyer's adage that goes something like this: Never put in writing anything that you don't want read in open court or by your mother. Maybe it's time for an updated adage: Never put in electronic form anything that you wouldn't want viewed by a million people, including your colleagues, students, and supervisors - and your mother.


I don't think that these Internet social networking sites have made life more dangerous, although it is more overwhelming packed with options and opportunities for catastrophically stupid choices. I think there are some really, really good things about these sites (I'll get to that with Thing 21). It's just that it was safer to screw up when your friends were folks in your neighborhood, and you knew their secrets as much as they knew yours. But all of you could leave your neighborhood to go elsewhere and start over, making all new mistakes with all new people.

Now, you misstep online and it could follow you everywhere and for always. That's a really big paradigm shift. I'm not sure the ape side of our brains is up to processing the full ramifications of that.

Sunday, February 24, 2008

Thing 4 - happy pics

Okay, easy enough to upload pictures onto Flickr. It makes me happy to think that if someone is looking to relocate to Royalton they might use Flickr and find that we have this bright, cheery library. (Of course, they might also see the library for Royalton, Vermont, but that's interesting, too.) I can see myself putting more pictures up to showcase library programs, FOL activities, etc.

However, I'm not sure how much I'd use Flickr for my personal photos. It just seems odd and strange to put my pictures out there in the public realm. My partner and I had dinner with a couple of friends on Friday, and we were talking about the generation gap around "public" and "private" information. We are all 40ish to 50ish, and we are all perplexed at how much personal information -- in the form of photos, profile interests, and more -- the avid Flickr'er's, Facebook'ers and MySpace'ers are willing to put on their pages. Put our pictures on the web... pictures of us, of our loved ones? You've got to be kidding! Is it safe? Is it secure? Is it appropriately modest social behavior?

So in that context, no thank you. However, to showcase the great little library that this small community is so proud of... well that's something I can get behind.

Also on Friday I had the opportunity to spend the day going back and forth between exploring the exhibits at the St. Paul Science Museum and spending time in the atrium reading over pages and pages of articles about Library 2.o, Web 2.0, etc. It was glorious. So nice to take a day to not just learn about some of this stuff but also to have time to actually think about it (and then go play with animation technology or look at dinosaur fossils).

One thing I found very interesting was an article about Beacon, a pesky little advertising program used by Facebook that keeps track of users' visits to certain web sites and then uses that information to target the first user's friends with very specific ads. One example: a little ad went out to a user's friends, and it said something like "Michelle gave Top Gun four stars" and linked to Blockbuster so that the friends could purchase the DVD.

The good news, according to the article, is that Beacon created quite the kerfuffle when it was released, and Facebook has made it easier to opt out.

The bad news, to my mind at least, is that advertising agencies and others are using their best and brightest minds to figure out how to plum the depths of a user's tags and preferences to keep track of the "virtual person" in order to sell the real person their stuff.

I guess that's the big irony/conundrum. There are some things about this Web 2.0 technology that are so transparent. It feels like a community of glass houses. At the same time, it is all so virtual, and the goals and tactics of the minds behind the technology can be obscured. Who is reading what I write (besides my friendly CMLE coach)? What technology is out there to figure out whether what I write is worth paying attention to? (I, for one, have doubts.)

Perhaps this is what is meant by the "radical trust" that kept coming up in the articles I read. I think I can give that trust to the person/family looking for information on the Royalton Public Library. And I'm happy to encourage and engage with her/him/them. I'll put happy pictures up on the web.

But would someone please tell me what's on the mind of the man behind the curtain?