Home | About | RSS Feed | Contact and Publicity Guidelines | Comment Policy the Law, the Universe, and Everything 

advertise-here4


Slip Opinions


Whatever happened to Henry Simons? (fp)

Wow -- that's some very scary poll results (kw)

The scarlet ankle bracelet. (fp)

Every good article should have one idea. (fp)

Family values in market turnover culture. (fp)

Banks really create value: probably $58 billion in overdraft fees & credit card penalties in 2009. (fp)

A Citizens United dream: Exxon could have deployed 10% of its 2008 profits to outspend every presidential and senatorial candidate that year. (fp)

Eternal Earth-Bound Pets promises to adopt your pet if you are raptured. (fp)

Habermas doesn't tweet, but does interview well. (fp)

Lessig on Google, copyright, orphans, and the future of access to information. (kw)

Our Podcast

Subscribe to Law Talk

law-rev-contents2.jpg


  • Posts by Author

  • Categories

  • Archives


  • Recent Comments

    • Kristina on Spring 2010: Is the Window Open?

    • PrometheeFeu on The Advantages and Disadvantages of Rewards

    • PoNyman on Very scary poll results

    • Civ Pro King on Privacy Rights in Death Photos: Catsuouras Case Decided

    • ParatrooperJJ on Privacy Rights in Death Photos: Catsuouras Case Decided

    • Lotta on The Take Away About Take Home Exams

    • Alan on Constitutional Rorschach Test (or Zen Koan)

    • Colin Crowe on The Take Away About Take Home Exams

    • Glomarization on Links and short thoughts on Amazonfail

    • Vinca on Book Review: Divergent Opinions: Why Community Matters — A Review of Sunstein’s Going to Extremes

    • A.J. Sutter on My Letter to the Economist on Climate Change

    • Keri Brooks on Spring 2010: Is the Window Open?

    • Illinois on Spring 2010: Is the Window Open?

    • Ken Rhodes on Constitutional Rorschach Test (or Zen Koan)

    • Ken Rhodes on My Letter to the Economist on Climate Change

  •  

    Site Meter

Privacy and Facebook: Give a Little Here, Take a Little There?

posted by Danielle Citron

Over the past year, Facebook has seemed more protective of privacy than ever before.  Its fan pages for government entities and businesses exemplified an exciting new way that technology can enshrine privacy into its architecture.  Facebook fan pages resemble one-way mirrors (or sorts), permitting individuals to provide feedback to government agencies and bFacebookusinesses and to gain insight into those entities’ worlds while forbidding those entities from peering back into their fans’ personal profiles.  This encourages civic engagement while eliminating concerns that fans’ social media data will be used for purposes that individuals’ would not endorse, such as law enforcement, immigration matters, etc.   In a forthcoming piece in the George Washington Law Review, I credit Facebook as a privacy norm entrepreneur for building fan pages and urge sites like MySpace to follow Facebook’s lead.  Doing so might even enhance user loyalty if stories emerge regarding government’s misuse of social media data from competitors’ sites.

Facebook’s launch of its new privacy settings this week, however, dampened my enthusiasm about its role as a privacy change leader.  To be sure, Facebook should be credited for explaining consumers’ choices more clearly with its new privacy settings.  But unfortunately they tend to push users to share more information, more widely, than the previous settings.  They also don’t provide a default setting that would permit more granular privacy choices vis-a-vis one’s social relationships.  Unless users take the time to customize particular postings (i.e., each time they write a wall post, upload a picture, etc.), privacy settings provide broad accessibility to wall postings, photos, etc. (to everyone as a default matter now) rather than permitting users to choose which friends can see those materials as a default matter.  This matters because users tend not to change default settings, a particularly likely result as users access Facebook via their PDAs and cellphones.

Granular default settings would more appropriately accord with our lived experiences.  Indeed, this is precisely the point that Dan Solove makes in The Future of Reputation: because our social relationships are nuanced and our levels of comfort in sharing information varies depending on the particular relationship, privacy settings should allow us to map those differences and honor them.  Although some note that the new privacy settings make it harder to preserve privacy (that may be true or untrue, I trust that social network experts like Dan, James Grimmelmann, and Bill McGeveran will drill down on that issue), my great disappointment is that the new privacy settings failed to introduce more granularity as a default matter–a missed opportunity indeed.  So Facebook has given us much with fan pages and not much more with its new privacy settings.  But let’s be thankful for what we did get, it’s the holiday season after all.

UPDATE:  Logical Extremes has a superb list of links for those interested in finding out more about the privacy implications and dangers of the new privacy policy.  Thanks to Bruce Boyden for helping me sort out these issues.


 December 11, 2009 at 7:04 am   Posted in: Privacy, Social Network Websites, Technology   Print This Post Print This Post

Responses (7)

  1. Bruce Boyden - December 11, 2009 at 9:23 am

    It looks to me like you can customize the settings for each post by defining groups or blocking specific people. But I don’t see a way to limit posts to certain groups as a default, so you’d have to do it each time.

  2. Danielle Citron - December 11, 2009 at 9:29 am

    Thanks so much, Bruce. Yes, that is what I assumed as I played around with the settings. That is a shame about the lack of a default function regarding groups and friends.

  3. Logical Extremes - December 11, 2009 at 9:52 am

    ACLU dotRights & EFF have had the best details on what the changes mean in practice. Yes, there are more granular controls for new posts, but users are being migrated to more open settings, and probably worse, more data is now declared Publicly Available Information with no say by the user.

    “PAI” [now] includes your name, profile photo, list of friends, pages you are a fan of, gender, networks to which you belong, and current city.” – PAI used to include only Name and Networks.

    I’ve put what I think are the best posts on the Facebook Privacy change in my Twitter stream:

    http://twitter.com/logicalextremes

    But this post says it best about the new public social graph, which I believe is the most egregious violation of privacy by Facebook:

    http://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2009/12/11/facebook-tosses-graph-privacy-into-the-bin/

  4. Logical Extremes - December 11, 2009 at 9:54 am

    BTW, if you click the lock icon pulldown below the “What’s on your mind?” field, there is a Customize choice. Within that, you can set up a default.

  5. Danielle Citron - December 11, 2009 at 9:59 am

    That is incredibly helpful scoop, Logical Extremes. Thanks so much!

  6. Bruce Boyden - December 11, 2009 at 2:04 pm

    Oops: http://trueslant.com/KashmirHill/2009/12/10/either-mark-zuckerberg-got-a-whole-lot-less-private-or-facebooks-ceo-doesnt-understand-the-companys-new-privacy-settings/

  7. Kaimipono D. Wenger - December 15, 2009 at 3:25 pm

    Another good guide is available at Gawker:

    http://gawker.com/5427077/the-valleywag-guide-to-restoring-your-privacy-on-facebook

Leave a Reply

*
To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture. Click on the picture to hear an audio file of the word.
Click to hear an audio file of the anti-spam word


  • « Previous post
  • Next post »

Authors

Daniel J. Solove
Kaimipono Wenger
Dave Hoffman
Nate Oman
Frank Pasquale
Deven Desai
Danielle Citron
Lawrence Cunningham
Sarah Waldeck
Jaya Ramji-Nogales
Solangel Maldonado
Gerard Magliocca

Guests

Adam Benforado
Mark Edwards
Michelle Harner
Kristin Johnson
Jeffrey Kahn
Alex Kreit
Viva Moffat
Adam Steinman










Previous Guests

Michael Abramowicz
Michelle Adams
Robert Ahdieh
Michelle Anderson
Laura Appleman
Ann Bartow
Francesca Bignami
Jeremy Blumenthal
Kathleen Boozang
Bruce Boyden
Donald Braman
Al Brophy
Neil H. Buchanan
Bill Burke-White
Scott Burris
Paul Butler
Naomi Cahn
Anupam Chander
Miriam Cherry
Jack Chin
Jennifer Collins
Thomas Crocker
Allison Danner
Brannon Denning
Deven Desai
Mike Dimino
Mark Edwards
David Fagundes
Christine Haight Farley
Kim Ferzan
Dan Filler
Michael Froomkin
Amanda Frost
Timothy Glynn
Rachel Godsil
Eric Goldman
David Gray
Craig Green
Tristin Green
Jeffrey Harrison
Erica Hashimoto
Carissa Hessick
Laura Heymann
Robert Hillman
Christine Hurt
Darian Ibrahim
John Ip
Kevin Johnson
Dan Kahan
Brian Kalt
Sam Kamin
Michael Kang
Chimène Keitner
Orin Kerr
Nancy Kim
Heidi Kitrosser
Adam Kolber
Russell Korobkin
Anita S. Krishnakumar
Susan Kuo
Greg Lastowka
Sarah Lawsky
Erik Lillquist
Jeff Lipshaw
Jonathan Lipson
Jacqueline Lipton
Joseph Liu
Michael Madison
Solangel Maldonado
Jason Mazzone
Linda McClain
William McGeveran
Salil Mehra
Carrie Menkel-Meadow
Max Minzner
Scott Moss
Eric Muller
Jaya Ramji-Nogales
Helen Norton
Elizabeth Nowicki
Paul Ohm
Michael O'Shea
David Opderback
Kristen Osenga
Rafael Pardo
Marcy Peek
Eduardo Peñalver
Robert Percival
David Post
Shruti Rana
Geoffrey Rapp
Neil Richards
Lori Ringhand
Alice Ristroph
Susan Scafidi
Paul Secunda
Jonathan Siegel
Jessica Silbey
Peter Smith
Charles Sullivan
Rick Swedloff
Steph Tai
Andrew Taslitz
Robert Tsai
Jenia Turner
Steve Vladeck
Spencer Weber Waller
Howard Wasserman
Melissa Waters
Frank Wu
Alfred Yen
Corey Yung
David Zaring
Timothy Zick
Michael Zimmer
Jonathan Zittrain

Ownership

Concurring Opinions is a
general-interest legal blog
operated by Concurring
Opinions LLC, a Pennsylvania
Limited Liability Corporation.

Blogroll

Above the Law
ACS Blog
Althouse
Balkinization
Becker-Posner Blog
BlackProf
BoingBoing
Chicago Law Faculty Blog
Conglomerate
CrimLaw
Crime & Federalism
CrimProf Blog
Crooked Timber
Discourse.net
Dorf on Law
Election Law
Emergent Chaos
The Faculty Lounge
Feminist Law Profs
43(B)log
Freakonomics Blog
Freedom to Tinker
Google Blogoscoped
How Appealing
Ideoblog
Info/Law
Instapundit.com
Juris Novus
Jurisdynamics
Law and Humanities Blog
Law and Letters
Law Librarian Blog
Legal Profession Blog
Legal Theory Blog
Legal Times Blog
Leiter Reports
Brian Leiter's Law School Reports
Lessig Blog
Madisonian Theory
Media Law Blog
Mirror of Justice
The Moderate Voice
National Security Advisors
Opinio Juris
Point of Law
PrawfsBlawg
ProfessorBainbridge.com
Property Prof Blog
Red Tape Chronicles
The Right Coast
Schneier on Security
SCOTUSBlog
Security Dilemmas
Sentencing Law and Policy
Simple Justice
Sivacracy.net
The Situationist
Susan Crawford
TalkLeft
Talking Points Memo
TaxProf Blog
Tech & Marketing Law
Truth on the Market
Volokh Conspiracy
WorkPlace Prof Blog
WSJ Law Blog
Wonkette
The Yin Blog


© Concurring Opinions

Powered by WordPress