Long ago,
the CEO of computer manufacturer Sun Microsystems concluded that consumer
privacy was a “red herring,” because one has “zero privacy anyway.” See https://www.wired.com/1999/01/sun-on-privacy-get-over-it/. Scott McNealy suggested that we simply “[g]et
over it.”
No, I will
not.
Few
subscribers of social media fully understand—or even partially understand—what extensive
privacy intrusions one has to accept in exchange for the privilege of
participating. Trust me (no pun
intended), we give up much, but not everything.
For example, one’s agreement to participate in a personality survey does
not grant they surveying party the option of mining all the available data from
all of survey taker’s friends.
Shame on
the survey taker, but greater shame on Facebook for doing nothing about this
egregious expropriation of subscriber data.
Facebook likes to move quickly and break things. In its lust for
revenue, its managers apparently think nothing of instances where major things
get busted.
The court
of public opinion, the stock market, various government agencies and
legislators throughout the world may convince social network senior executives
that they better take seriously the consequences of the things they help break. They can start with a risk assessment about whether
significant subscribers will lose trust.
Apparently,
Facebook senior management thinks this latest episode will blow over in a few
days. Perhaps, but I trust the instincts
of my wife who intends on deleting her account.
Social
networks exploit subscribers’ trust that the mined data has reasonable uses and
reach. Facebook has unclean hands when
it facilitates the commercial exploitation of private information about which
the subscriber has not consented to such use.
