Facebook - Why Not Let Sleeping Dogs Lie?
Michael Arrington
40 comments »
Just as the press was getting bored with talking about the problems with Facebook’s new advertising platform, Beacon (first mentioned here on November 2), founder Mark Zuckerberg goes on 60 Minutes to stir everything back up again (the show will be on air this Sunday).
Beacon is interesting, as Zuckerberg puts it, because “What would you rather see? A banner ad from Bloomingdale’s or that one of your friends bought a scarf?”
Exactly. Except there were two fundamental problems with Beacon. The first problem, now resolved, was that users were unwittingly participating and sharing this information. Now users can choose to opt out of Beacon. Not as good as an opt-in, but its a move in the right direction.
The second problem hasn’t been resolved, though. Facebook is allowing advertisers to use user images and names in their ads. So if one of your friends adds a third party application, you may see an advertisement that shows their picture, prints their name and says that they’ve added the application.
Certainly click throughs and responses increase with the addition of a recommendation from a friend in an advertisement. But all of this may be in violation of publicity rights in place in many states that prohibit the commercial exploitation of a person’s image and likeness without permission or contractual compensation. The image to the right is an example that a confused reader sent to me - he saw the ad on his profile and wondered if I was affiliated with Blockbuster’s Movie Clique application or with the Jackass movie.
As far as I can tell there is no point where users are agreeing to the use of their image and name in advertisements, explicitly or even buried in the terms and conditions of the site. Whether or not it violates people’s privacy rights is a legal issue, and one that doesn’t appear to have been pushed to the lawyers yet. But the ice is rather thin, and Facebook is treading away.
Hello, it’s 2008. Facebook is so 2007. Quit looking for the easy story and find us some news already.
sorry, can’t help it. will try harder.
http://thenextweb.org/2008/01/.....magazines/
This is the answer to FB advertising problems NOT beacon.
must have been in the fine print….so which social site do we join?
click through rates will be fantastic for first few months and after almost every facebook user will learn that those are crap ads with their friend names in them click through rate will go down, and down, and down.
and that will be the moment when facebook will become myspace and mark will hace to forget 15 billions in his pocket:D
HAHAHA, that ad almost looks like its trying to be a caption.
There must be a differentiation here of news feeds about the application, and social ads.
Everytime you install an application, you asked to give explicit permission to allow the application publish information about your actions to your friends via the news feed / mini feed.
So, the problem here is not of permission to release the story, but whether apps are allowed to put an advert next to a story that you’ve allowed them to release to your friends.
Seeing as this is the whole concept of social ads, I would expect that Facebook did some pretty serious research into it’s legality. However, it would still be good if you got a tick box with the app, or page (i.e. are you happy for the app to advertise next to your news feed stories).
Main thing to remember is that if someone doesn’t want to be affiliated with an app they’re using, they have the choice at any time to stop this by turning off news feed stories for the app, which will then prevent news feed stories combined with social ads like the one above.
Shows the importance of reading the I accept clause of free web site portals.
http://tekno-world.blogspot.com
exiva.com- share your life, treasure the privacy
Simple, clean and easy to use
the only significance of facebook for me is as a sheepometer… if the sheep look up, concerned, or if they just keep munching…
beacon, they looked up, endorsements, i bet they just keep munching…
basically, now, anybody with a glimmer, government or corporate, knows they can do anything to the masses, and the masses will just keep munching, as long as there is something to munch…. even cotton candy
Mike:
FB owns the network..they own the users..they will do what’er they want to..
I won’t be surprised if FB shares a penny with the users and that ways, most f the users would love to have “FB generated recommended beacons”..
-sinha
The whole “Facebook-kid”-image is so false, as if the venture capitalists behind the money didn’t have a say on what’s next.
“Facebook is allowing advertisers to use user images and names in their ads.”
That’s very bad. Yet another reason I’m happy to not be a member.
Some people prepare their whole lives to have their images used in advertisements. They are called models. You aren’t a model by any means, Mike, so you should be grateful.
The guy is a dumbass . He got lucky( right place , right time and knowing the people ).
This goes to show that Zuck is only where he is at because of his contact.
————
http://www.xencasino.com
Facebook has the explicit right to use any and all user information and content, while it remains on the site. Thats for any purpose, anywhere anytime. They could make a huge billboard or that embarrassing photo of you and plaster it all over the world, you wouldn’t get a penny. As some one mentioned earlier, a good reason to read the fine print.
Drawn.ca featured an interesting and informative post regarding this topic late last year, worth a read through.
http://drawn.ca/2007/12/05/adv.....-facebook/
Have to chime in here - for all the hype and chatter about “Beacon” and Facebook’s ad targeting technology, blah blah blah, why is it that EVERY TIME I log into my account it displays an ad for “Local Singles in Your Area” … when I’ve taken the time to select “In a relationship” in my profile! Do they even use my most basic preferences?
I mean, seriously! These social networks have nothing but hot air in the backend.
Not only is this Social Ads thing offensive in that it uses people’s images without their permission or knowledge in an advertisement, it’s not even effective advertising to begin with. It’s not targeted.
On my Facebook page I list interests. I list activities. I list my location. The fact that so and so is a fan of say Blockbuster and then Blockbuster is promoting Jackass doesn’t mean a damn thing unless I’ve displayed on my page that I have an interest in movies.
There’s also a distinct possibility that someone may end up promoting a movie that they find offensive.
It’s amateurish, it’s offensive, and it’s ineffective.
Yet I bet Gregory will, in the end, be proven correct.
@Michael Arrington (King of teh tech bloggerz)
“But all of this may be in violation of publicity rights in place in many states that prohibit the commercial exploitation of a person’s image and likeness without permission or contractual compensation.”
I think this point is spot on. IMHO, if Facebook offers a revenue-share model the popularity of beacon will go through the roof. Think of it as AdSense for consumers.
Mike,
I hate to do this, because it’s so nitpicky, but I hate a mixed metaphor.
And you mixed your metaphors there, badly.
You tread water, you skate on ice.
@17: I wouldn’t be at all surprised if Facebook graphically analysed any pictures of your girlfriend on Facebook and gave her a rating out of 10, then calculated an infidelity probability based on the number of ex-partners it knows you’ve had, the prevalence of flirty banter in your messages to non-partners, and your religion or lack of it. Then it serves ads appropriately.
beacon notified me that one of my facebook friends was searching for dates on some dating site….
If I were him, dont’ sure I’d want that sent out to my entire network….
Just one step closer to having news feeds with quick updates such as “Bob is out at lunch” “Steve is in the bathroom” and “That’s not your wife Alan.”
@19 David you are spot on. Beacon is not harmful if you can opt in and get rewarded for your privacy data (aka Attention). The people who decry beacon will soon sell their privacy to trusted brokers if they can make money from spamming their friends and the first people will be “A$£@-listers” Scoble and Le Meur.
Arrington will you then either decry pay per privacy like you did pay per post or give it a blind eye because Zuckerberg is your friend.
Personally selling my attention to a trusted broker like FB who then gets targeted advertisers or money off offers for me in exchange is the way I would like to see it go.
I wish people would stop complaining every time TC posts a story about Facebook. I know people are tired of hearing about, but they have 55 million users. I’m betting half the people who commented on this thread have a facebook account, even if they don’t use it much. When they go on 60 minutes, that’s legitimate tech news. TC is good enough to put up about 10 posts a day…if 10% of them are about the biggest social networking site on the planet then I think that’s understandable. If you’re sick of hearing about facebook, then just ignore those stories.
This is like people complaining “I’m sick of hearing about the iraq war on the nightly news. That’s so 2007″. It’s relevant, get over it.
Publicity Rights in most states (statute or c/l) only protect “celebrities”. I doubt most Facebook users are celebrities.
they’ve got millions of users and they can’t squeeze five bucks out of them a year, it is sort of an embarrassment, but think about it - that is unbelievable. they have to have a plan that isn’t Beacon. i mean any rave promoter can do better than that. facebook should start figuring out some serious WILLINGNESS TO PAY action. what is it that their users are currently buying that they can provide to them cheaper? then sell it to them. or what netflix did - re-imagine the demand for DVD watching as being FAR LARGER than the current market demand, if only the correct distribution paradigm were created, and then create that distribution paradigm.
mark, just think like this:
* here is what our users are paying for in the real world
* here is what we can provide that same service or product for, it’s cheaper
* let’s offer it to them cheaper
* let’s get millions of people to buy it and then it becomes cheaper still
* boom.
so this could apply to anything, right? how about CAR INSURANCE? how about a FACEBOOK DISCOUNT CARD? with millions of dollars in the bank, and the ability to throw millions of potential customers at any partner merchant, they could create completely new business models for themselves that aren’t just ADVERTISING. Toss Beacon in the trash, Mark, and come up with something better !!!
Hi,
Facebook isn’t the largest social network.
Any of the IM operators have the potential to be bigger.
Is it a bit rich that the same people who say that set the music free, uncompensated (against corporate interests), then also complain when it works the other way to free “your” data?
Facebook has been rapidly evolving over the last year in terms of people and technology, they are still finding their feet with privacy and beacon, these issues will be resolved.
Anyone who’s got problems with Facebook, might want to start with the whole concept of recreating Aol.com, circa 1990’s, rather then the issues that follow.
Yours kindly,
Shakir Razak
How can a “media” company be worth $15,000,000,000 yet have not one single successful advertising platform on its resume?
I wonder if Zuckerberg is going to try and sell Mike Wallace a $1 virtual teddy bear or “BFF” pendant on Sunday.
Sucks trying to justify a $15 Billion valuation…
They’ve had a great thing going up until now, I hope they don’t destroy it!
Well I just became a member of Bebo and found it pretty well designed and easy to use. Facebook is becoming little spammy now a days and few of my friends still find it tough to use it. I think facebook should get a solution for that first before implementing beacons etc to generate more revenue
The Internet has always been about pushing the edges of the envelope to see what is acceptable - Facebook is no different. Let them be.
Hmmmm. Here’s the interview i was hoping CBS would show….
http://lairigmarketing.blogspot.com