{"id":87485,"date":"2009-12-17T18:45:40","date_gmt":"2009-12-17T23:45:40","guid":{"rendered":"9329 at http:\/\/www.eff.org"},"modified":"2009-12-17T18:45:40","modified_gmt":"2009-12-17T23:45:40","slug":"the-world-reacts-to-the-new-facebook","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/87485","title":{"rendered":"The World Reacts to The New Facebook"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>\nIt&#8217;s been a little over a week since Facebook <a href=\"http:\/\/www.facebook.com\/press\/releases.php?p=133917\">debuted<\/a> a massive revamp of its privacy settings. EFF immediately followed that release with a <a href=\"http:\/\/www.eff.org\/deeplinks\/2009\/12\/facebooks-new-privacy-changes-good-bad-and-ugly\">detailed critique<\/a>, concluding that the changes were &#8220;clearly intended to push Facebook users to publicly share <em>even more<\/em> information than before [and] will actually <em>reduce<\/em> the amount of control that users have over some of their personal data.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\n<center><br \/>\n<a href=\"http:\/\/www.joyoftech.com\/joyoftech\/joyarchives\/1330.html\" ><br \/>\n<img decoding=\"async\" src=\"http:\/\/www.eff.org\/files\/fb.jot.png\"\/><br \/>\n<\/a><br \/>\n<\/center>\n<\/p>\n<p>\nSince then, EFF&#8217;s criticisms &mdash; and those of other vocal privacy advocates like <a href=\"http:\/\/www.aclunc.org\/issues\/technology\/blog\/facebook_privacy_in_transition_-_but_where_is_it_heading.shtml\">ACLU<\/a>, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.cdt.org\/blogs\/adam-rosenberg\/cdt-statement-facebooks-new-privacy-settings\">CDT<\/a>, and <a href=\"http:\/\/epic.org\/privacy\/facebook\/\">EPIC<\/a> &mdash; have been echoed throughout the <a href=\"http:\/\/www.reuters.com\/article\/idUSTRE5B82F320091210?type=technologyNews\">mainstream<\/a> <a href=\"http:\/\/bits.blogs.nytimes.com\/2009\/12\/10\/facebooks-privacy-changes-draw-more-scrutiny\/?hp\">press<\/a> <a href=\"http:\/\/gawker.com\/5426176\/facebooks-great-betrayal\">and<\/a> <a href=\"http:\/\/www.wired.com\/epicenter\/2009\/12\/facebook-privacy-backlash\/\">across<\/a> <a href=\"http:\/\/www.computerworld.com\/s\/article\/9142042\/Facebook_privacy_changes_draw_mixed_reviews\">the<\/a> <a href=\"http:\/\/www.readwriteweb.com\/archives\/facebook_pushes_people_to_go_public.php\">web<\/a>. As a Boston Globe editorial titled <a href=\"http:\/\/www.boston.com\/bostonglobe\/editorial_opinion\/editorials\/articles\/2009\/12\/16\/facebooks_privacy_downgrade\/\">&#8220;Facebook&#8217;s Privacy Downgrade&#8221;<\/a> correctly pointed out, &#8220;Most people who join Facebook do so because they want to share photos and messages with friends and family, not to expose their lives to the entire world.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\nNotably, in a testament to the even-handedness of EFF&#8217;s critique, The Atlantic cited our blog post both in a story collecting <a href=\"http:\/\/atlanticwire.theatlantic.com\/opinions\/view\/opinion\/Facebook-Privacy-Policy-Switch-Makes-Users-Feel-Hoodwinked-1865\">negative reactions<\/a> and in another story collecting <a href=\"http:\/\/atlanticwire.theatlantic.com\/opinions\/view\/opinion\/The-Bright-Side-of-Facebooks-Unpopular-Privacy-Overhaul-1872\">positive reactions<\/a> to the Facebook privacy revamp.\n<\/p>\n<p>\nNot to be outdone by the media, Facebook users themselves were also immediately up in arms over the new changes.  Negative comments flooded the <a href=\"http:\/\/blog.facebook.com\/blog.php?post=197943902130&amp;comments\">Facebook Blog<\/a> and the <a href=\"http:\/\/www.facebook.com\/fbsitegovernance\">Facebook Site Governance<\/a> page. Several of those comments were collected by the San Francisco Chronicle in a story titled <a href=\"http:\/\/www.sfgate.com\/cgi-bin\/article.cgi?f=\/g\/a\/2009\/12\/09\/urnidgns852573C40069388000257687007BB3A7.DTL\">&#8220;Facebook users speak out against new privacy settings&#8221;<\/a>.  Meanwhile, unhappy users used Facebook itself to organize opposition to the changes, with <a href=\"http:\/\/www.facebook.com\/group.php?gid=195808528468&amp;ref=nf\">new<\/a> <a href=\"http:\/\/www.facebook.com\/group.php?gid=238465067456\">groups<\/a> being formed to protest the privacy revamp and <a href=\"http:\/\/www.facebook.com\/group.php?gid=5930262681\">older<\/a> <a href=\"http:\/\/www.facebook.com\/group.php?gid=27233634858\">groups<\/a> seeing renewed activity.\n<\/p>\n<p>\nThe past week&#8217;s privacy backlash culminated today with the <a href=\"http:\/\/epic.org\/2009\/12\/epic-defends-privacy-of-facebo.html\">filing<\/a> of a <a href=\"http:\/\/www.epic.org\/privacy\/inrefacebook\/EPIC-FacebookComplaint.pdf\">complaint<\/a> with the Federal Trade Commission by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (<a href=\"http:\/\/www.epic.org\">EPIC<\/a>), joined by several other consumer and privacy groups.  In the complaint, EPIC alleges that Facebook&#8217;s latest privacy changes are deceptive and unfair and asks that the FTC open an investigation and order Facebook to restore to its users the control over their privacy that has been lost in the transition.  Considering the many tens of millions of American consumers who use Facebook, we hope and expect that the FTC will seriously consider the important questions raised by today&#8217;s complaint.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>It&#8217;s been a little over a week since Facebook debuted a massive revamp of its privacy settings. EFF immediately followed that release with a detailed critique, concluding that the changes were &#8220;clearly intended to push Facebook users to publicly share even more information than before [and] will actually reduce the amount of control that users [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[7],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-87485","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/87485","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=87485"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/87485\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=87485"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=87485"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=87485"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}