Facebook and Privacy
Faceable and Privacy Link: http://www. Rewritable. Com/archives/ faceable_user_data_analysis. PH Objective Summary: Ex-Apple Engineer, Peter Warden, has collected public fan page data from 215 million Faceable pages, revealing current trends, such as ‘God’ being the number one most popular fan page among Faceable users in the Southern U. S.
, whereas ‘Barack Obama’ featured heavily for San Francisco users, and ‘Struck’ was number one in Idaho. Warden plans to release this data to the academic community because he sees great potential in the data that can be extracted from these sites. This process is called data harvesting.The article suggests future academic work in this area is likely to coco impacting on people’s privacy. (FACTS – 1 00 words) Response: The ETHICAL issue central to this article is privacy and control. On one hand, Warden claims his intentions are altruistic (helpful to others) and that the data he is making visible here is a matter of public discourse. However, the FACTS are that individual users who are generating this data have neither been consulted about the data collection nor have they given permission for Warden to use it.
Facebook and Privacy Essay Example
Clearly Warden does not VALUE other’s people’s privacy as much as he WANTS (emotion) to create the website.The argument could be made that once a user ‘becomes a fan’ of a page on Faceable or, indeed, publishes any content to the internet, that information becomes public. User who have deployed privacy settings to carefully maintain a strong sense of control over their profiles, however, might well feel very ANGRY about this use of their data. Faceable can harvest that data (and does, for targeted advertising purposes) because they have a commitment to those advertisers (emotion)and engineers like Warden can develop data-trawling engines to collect accessible information across a massive dataset.The LAW needs to be such clearer about the rights of consumers, companies and advertisers in these situations. As Faceable is presumably bound by its own set of critically considered ETHICAL guidelines, these are nevertheless underpinned by commercial VALUES and a vested interest (emotion) in keeping the data of its users from competitors. Warden claims to be operating under his own set Of ethics that privilege (value) the furthering of knowledge.
The issue then shifts to the academic community. Warden contends that one of his central motivations for collecting this data was so that he could share it with the academic immunity.