Facebook: ‘We don’t listen to your conversations’

Social- media giant Facebook has once again denied it listens to users’ conversations in order to show relevant adverts.

Many users have reported seeing adverts related to recent real-life conversations, suspecting they were triggered by Facebook listening to them through the microphone on their computer, phone or tablet.

But in a message on Twitter Rob Goldman, the company’s vice-president of ads, wrote: “We don’t – and have never - used your microphone for ads. Just not true”.

He was responding to a tweet by PJ Vogt, who presents the technology podcast Reply All ( https://gimletmedia.com/ reply-all): “Call us if you believe that Facebook uses your mic to spy on you for ad reasons”.

Vogt received many replies from people who think Facebook might be listening to them.

One person, Kelley, wrote: “I have been talking about getting a cat. I didn’t post about it anywhere but I did start seeing ads for cat food”.

Another, Tori Hoover, wrote: “A co-worker got an ad saying ‘so you popped the question!’ minutes after he proposed, before he told anyone it had happened”.

Facebook knocked back similar accusations in 2016, saying in a statement online ( www.snipca.com/26066): “We show ads based on people’s interests and other profile information – not what you’re talking out loud about”. However, it did confirm that it accesses your phone or tablet’s microphone if you give its app permission to do so, and if you regularly use a feature that requires audio. These include a tool in the US that listens to background music or films so you can add what you are listening to or watching to your status update.

Coincidence?

Psychology could play a part in the perceived connection between conversations and adverts. Many studies have shown that people are more likely to see and remember something if they have been recently talking or thinking about it.

So it may be that the adverts appeared before,

possibly in response to a search on Google, but were noticed only after a related conversation.

Coincidence may be another factor, as suggested last year by mathematics Professor David Hand from Imperial College London. He told the BBC, which was investigating whether phones were listening to conversations, that people are “evolutionarily trained to seek explanations”.

He added: “This apparent coincidence occurs and we think there must be explanation, it can’t be chance. But there are so many opportunities for that coincidence to occur”.