Zuckerberg flubs details of Facebook privacy commitments

LOGGING OFF Shane O'Brien is not prepared to put up with the misuse of his information

LOGGING OFF Shane O'Brien is not prepared to put up with the misuse of his information Trish Bowman

The first regulatory challenge to Facebook's practices for non-users may come next month when a new European Union law, known as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), takes effect and requires notice and consent prior to data collection. Facebook users are sharing their locations, photos of themselves and members of their families daily. Inevitably the new age appears somewhere in the many ensuing comments.

Facebook will keep failing users' trust as long as its business is based on the unrestrained grabbing of as much user data as possible, and crafting ever-more innovative ways for advertisers to harness that information for commercial goals.

While some of this information may be expected, as much of the information is logged onto the profile, other tabs can be more concerning.

Zuckerberg, for instance, said the collection was done for security purposes, without explaining further or saying whether it was also used for measurement or analytics, Gillmor said, adding that Facebook had a business incentive to use the non-user data to target ads.

The Guardian pointed out the absurdity this way: "Two tweets, one each from Sens".

But, a survey of 1,000 people by Techpinions found only 9 percent said they would delete their accounts. But their tweets reveal the unspoken dynamic: "Zuckerberg is in the hot seat today, but Facebook still has all the power".

The privacy breaches have led to speculation that many people would leave Facebook to protect their personal information.

Last year, Facebook generated about $19.5 billion in US and Canada ad revenue from its average monthly active users of more than 235 million, working out to about $82 each.

The takeaway buzzword in the hearings, however, was "regulation". It calculated the maximum number of friends that users could have had while the personality quiz app built by Cambridge Analytica was collecting data. Then the data was sold to Cambridge Analytica, a political research firm which had ties to Donald Trump's presidential campaign.

But Blumenthal wasn't buying it. These apps are likely to be selling our personal information to outside companies for their own benefit. But hey, at least he confirmed that Facebook was not listening on your microphone to target its ads as a consolation prize. But he also dodged some important queries by invoking "his team". I probably post more than some but a lot less than others. Facebook said it uses browsing data to create analytics reports, including about traffic to a site. How many fake accounts have been removed?

In my view as a scholar of law and ethics in the technology industry, Facebook - and other leading tech firms such as Google and Twitter - should join nations around the world and declare that privacy and cybersecurity are human rights that must be respected. But I'm already seen in some quarters as a grouch. you bet your life there's need to make it worse. But Zuckerberg and Sandberg, he insists, both have to be "honest" about what's happened and recognize its "civic responsibility" in strengthening democracy.

That's the take from several leading digital political advertisers - including one Democrat and the other two Republican - who privately say they've already been finding and exploiting loopholes in Facebook's new privacy rules as they gear up for the U.S. midterm elections. We can also all read the fine print, especially the lawyer-speak that might as well be in Swahili. "They also are really great surveillance devices".

"Because of the high visibility of our company, our compensation & governance committee has authorized an "overall security program" for Mr. Zuckerberg to address safety concerns due to specific threats to his safety arising directly as a result of his position as our founder, Chairman, and CEO", the statement said.

Latest News