wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

Comments

• [1] Anonymous December 03, 2007 - 10:43AM

  Actually after alot of press coverage and a petition on MoveOn.org, Facebook has agreed to change their policy. They say in the future, users will have to specifically opt-in to share your shopping lists. I for one use Facebook and do all my shopping online, and none of my shopping lists have ever appeared on their site... so I don't know how this happened.

  
  
• [2] Gaines from Knoxville, TN December 03, 2007 - 10:45AM

  I'd withdraw from facebook entirely if it weren't so necessary to finding keg parties on campus. But, after hearing about this papers, I'm taking everything off of my facebook except my membership. Does facebook have a competitor where its customers can go?

  (On a side note, anyone else having trouble getting the MP3 stream for AM820 to run in Winamp today?)

  
  
• [3] Gaines from Knoxville, TN December 03, 2007 - 10:46AM

  re: Anonymous

  I've heard about this, but I think the opt-in has a 2 day deadline. At the end of the deadline, they will display the information. Privacy is still not the default setting.

  
  
• [4] Jeremy from Manhattan December 03, 2007 - 10:47AM

  Don't you first have to opt into that plug-in/extension in the first place? It is my understanding that this doesn't happen to all Facebook users; if you didn't add that plug-in, your purchases would not be broadcast.

  
  
• [5] Kristine from Brooklyn December 03, 2007 - 10:48AM

  I, for one, am glad to hear they've pulled back on it. I had heard about the new advertising route they were taking, but wasn't sure the scope till I purchased a couple items for my boyfriend for Christmas a couple weeks ago and a few hours later signed into Facebook and saw my purchase announced in my newsfeed -- it even linked to the exact thing. Thankfully, I deleted it before he saw it, but still, it was a sort of silly joke gift -- certainly nothing representing my purchasing habits -- and yet there it was spelled out for my friends that I was endorsing this item. I'm usually wary when going through the check out process and didn't see anything that was alerting me that it would be broadcast. I was especially shocked because it was such a small online retail site and not Amazon.com.

  
  
• [6] Erica from Brooklyn December 03, 2007 - 10:50AM

  A good idea gone a muck.

  
  
• [7] Derek Tutschulte from Brooklyn December 03, 2007 - 10:53AM

  From ValleyWag on redefining opt-in:

  People say the craziest things to New York Times reporters. In an attempt to explain that Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg wasn't, you know, lying when he implied to NYT staffer Louise Story that Facebook's Beacon ads wouldn't report on users' purchases and other activities unless they opted in to the system, "Matt Hicks, a Facebook spokesman, said Mr. Zuckerberg had meant that users would be given the opportunity to opt out of having information sent out by Beacon, and the company had assumed that anyone who didn't say no meant yes." As Story reports, Coke is having the same "Huh?" reaction, and has withdrawn from early participation in Beacon ads. [edited]

  
  
• [8] carolita from manhattan December 03, 2007 - 10:55AM

  I just bought a bunch of books on amazon.com, and was not offered any chance to "opt out" of anything. I'm still waiting to see if my purchases show up on Facebook. However, I can't find anything on Facebook that offers me any opt in or opt outs on my purchases! Where is it?????

  
  
• [9] scott from manhattan December 03, 2007 - 10:55AM

  The worth of Facebook is just silly. remember Friendster? How many people are still on that? They all went to MySpace. Now people are getting off of myspace and migrating to facebook. Soon, someone else will come along with a better social networking site.

  
  
• [10] Nick from Austin, Tx December 03, 2007 - 10:56AM

  I've been really happy with orkut. It's google based and very nice to use - faster than all the rest as well.

  
  
• [11] Paulo from Paterson, New Jersey December 03, 2007 - 10:58AM

  Well, I understand what people are saying about being willing to sacrifice some privacy, but why do so needlessly? I mean, this isn't an unavoidable consequence. This is a corporate policy that could easily not have been put in place. Sure, they have the right to do it, but that doesn't mean they should.

  
  
• [12] Robin R from East Brunswick, NJ December 03, 2007 - 10:59AM

  One wonders how people have any time to do anything important these days. To hear someone say that he visits facebook and it's satisfying because he can easily spend an hour or two checking out friends... Who cleans his room or completes his assignments at work or school?

  
  
• [13] Arthur from Beacon Affiliates December 03, 2007 - 11:00AM

  Can someone post a list of Beacon Affiliates, e.g., Fandango.com, so that we can all just avoid these sites if we wish. The only other alternative seems to be to erase all one's cookies and to logout of Facebook BEFORE one gets "caught" on a Beacon affiliate.

  
  
• [14] John December 03, 2007 - 11:04AM

  I have no problem with the privacy on Facebook. One can choose to share or not share-- after all, there are other social networks out there which allow greater control over security of posts and interests. Livejournal, in particular, allows "friends-only" posts, and multiple filter lists allowing one to read only certain posts, or to post only to certain people. One thing that is nice about Facebook is that it allows a centralization of various social networks easily, by way of RSS feeds and links, so if someone wants to look into your life a bit deeper, they can move over to other sites you inhabit, where you do exercize more control. Anyone who puts all their eggs in one basket is missing the whole point of social networking. At least we've gotten past the complete monopoly of MySpace in the media. Maybe someday the press will catch up to the fact that there is a lot more out there.

  
  
• [15] Anonymous December 03, 2007 - 11:05AM

  This is OLD NEWS. And if Brian and his staff did their homework, they wouldn't have to ask the guest about the accuracy of the first comment! They also wouldn't bother doing a story on this, considering it's been "resolved."