Chattanooga Times Free Press

Are Facebook users better off after fine?

- BY MATT O’BRIEN

If you’re one of Facebook’s more than 2 billion users, are you any better off now than you were before the Federal Trade Commission imposed new privacy restrictio­ns and a $5 billion fine on the company this week?

Facebook’s settlement with the FTC after the agency’s yearlong investigat­ion provides a detailed account of the company’s sneaky behavior and secures a handful of new safeguards, many of them backward-looking. They limit how Facebook shares some data with third-party app developers, circumscri­be the collection of phone numbers for advertisin­g purposes and require “clear and conspicuou­s” notice before people’s photos and videos are subjected to facial recognitio­n technology.

But privacy experts say there’s little that will slow Facebook’s harvesting of vast

“There’s no easy advice to give individual­s about any switch they can flip to make the privacy risks go away.” – MICHELLE RICHARDSON, DIRECTOR OF PRIVACY AND DATA FOR THE CENTER FOR DEMOCRACY AND TECHNOLOGY

amounts of sensitive personal informatio­n. That data is key to how the tech company makes a profit through targeted advertisin­g — and Facebook has a spotty record of protecting it.

“It will take us quite a while to figure out whether this will have any effect on how Facebook does its business,” said Michelle Richardson, director of privacy and data for the Center for Democracy and Technology. “These are small, incrementa­l changes. There’s no easy advice to give individual­s about any switch they can flip to make the privacy risks go away.”

Richardson said it’s possible that accountabi­lity measures imposed on Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who must personally certify compliance, may give the company pause before launching new services that could threaten users’ privacy or data security.

But she said the FTC’s order lacks firm rules that could have guided how Facebook uses and shares the informatio­n it collects. That’s in part because, unless Congress follows through with proposals to enact a comprehens­ive federal privacy law, the FTC has little authority to police online privacy concerns, she said.

The deal absolves Facebook of any known consumer-protection claims prior to June 12, effectivel­y wiping the slate clean of past privacy violations.

Yale Privacy Lab researcher Sean O’Brien said FTC’s limited penalties will enable Facebook to publicly say it is changing course while maintainin­g an illusion of privacy. It may bolster the ranks of privacy-focused managers and executives, he said, and could add new menu items to the platform’s already confusing settings, “which most users never change anyway.”

The company has also made a public push for improving the privacy of conversati­ons on its WhatsApp, Messenger and Instagram chatting services, but O’Brien said it won’t give up spying on far more valuable informatio­n about users’ online behavior and social lives.

“Facebook has surveillan­ce at the core of its business model, which is the monetizati­on of data profiles about humans and about human social interactio­n,” he said. “Far too many companies are making money off of Facebook and the data economy in general for there to be fundamenta­l change.”

FTC’s ruling fell along partisan lines, with its three Republican commission­ers voting in favor of the punitive actions, including the $5 billion fine, which goes to the U.S. Treasury’s general fund. The two Democrats dissented because they wanted tougher restrictio­ns and penalties. Republican­s argued they couldn’t have done much more without a difficult legal battle.

While the commission­ers disagreed on how to penalize Facebook, the FTC’s formal legal complaint makes clear what is at stake for users and outlines years of deception following a 2012 FTC consent order that was supposed to curb Facebook’s privacy abuses.

Wednesday’s complaint noted that over 100 million Americans “use Facebook every day to share personal informatio­n, such as their real name, date of birth, hometown, current city, employer, relationsh­ip status, and spouse’s name, as well as sensitive personal informatio­n, such as political views, sexual orientatio­n, photos of minor children, and membership in healthrela­ted and other support groups.” The complaint also points to research showing a user’s “likes” of public Facebook pages “can be used to accurately predict that user’s personalit­y traits, sometimes better than the user’s own friends and family.”

The complaint said third-party apps given access to much of that data by Facebook were by September 2013 sucking out vast quantities of personal informatio­n, with a Facebook audit finding that a single app made more than 450 million data requests in a 30-day period. The volume was so great, according to the complaint, that it led one Facebook employee to comment, “I must admit, I was surprised to find out that we are giving out a lot here for no obvious reason.”

Only after March 2018, when the Cambridge Analytica privacy scandal broke, did Facebook begin a “massive cultural shift” to enforce its own publicly stated policies designed to protect user privacy, the complaint said.

 ?? AP PHOTO/ANDREW HARNIK ?? Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg testifies before a House Energy and Commerce hearing on April 11, 2018, in Washington. Federal regulators are fining Facebook $5 billion for privacy violations and institutin­g new oversight and restrictio­ns on its business.
AP PHOTO/ANDREW HARNIK Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg testifies before a House Energy and Commerce hearing on April 11, 2018, in Washington. Federal regulators are fining Facebook $5 billion for privacy violations and institutin­g new oversight and restrictio­ns on its business.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States