Balancing Social Convenience with Privacy

May 10, 2010 · Posted in Articles, Social Media, Strategy, Technology, Web · View Comments 
Evolution of Facebook Privacy

Evolution of Facebook Privacy - Matt McKeon 2010

In a world where being able to connect with old friends, family, co-workers, and connections is now the “norm” it surprises me when we start to see backlash as we are with Facebook recently. Especially when these are FREE services. However, everyone in the Internet age has been foregoing bits and pieces of their privacy for the convenience of connecting with each other and interacting in a social way online.

The thing is that when we interact online we are always leaving a little digital signature of who we are, where we came from, what we did, etc. Part of this is an aspect of the Web in general through cookies and GPS coordinates. Another part is just by virtue of how the Web works and how analytics are tracking site behavior. While Web sites may not know who you are specifically (unless you log in), they will certainly get a good idea of what you like and deliver better content next time.

Free sites have to make money. Running Web servers, development costs, etc all costs money and no investor or venture capitalist is going to invest in a company without the potential to get their money back. So for companies like Facebook, Twitter, Hulu, (insert name of cool website with free service), they all have the same issue; how will they make money? For many, it will be in online advertising. Google does this with most of its products from Google Search to Gmail to YouTube. Facebook does it with ads and virtual gifts. Even LinkedIn does it with their online recruiting (job board), research arm, and advertisements. However, nobody really seems to care about it when it is advertising because most often it is what keeps the service free to use. Do you remember when Google first rolled out ads that were contextual to your search, or your email messages? Everyone was outraged, yet millions of people still use those services. When you go onto Amazon and you see products that are based on your behavior, your information you have shared and more. No matter what we do online, the more we want convenience of personalized information and use of free services we will have to give up a piece of our privacy. When you check-in at a restaurant using Yelp, Foursquare or Gowalla, you are sending out your location over the web. “I’m here!”

Surprisingly I?ve seen little mention of the possible reasons why Facebook has shifted their privacy policy. I was recently at Facebook?s HQ and the light bulb went off for me when it came up in conversation. Facebook doesn?t want to be a social network anymore, they want to be a single source of your online presence. They want to provide you, the user, with news, communications, and ability to interaction with all your social graphs (friends, family, co-workers, and brands). Facebook has become a platform and stopped being a social network.

The easiest way that Facebook, and other social networks, are integrating your personal information is via their authentication tools. In Facebook?s world this is Facebook Connect. It allows you, the user, to log into another website with your Facebook credentials. In some cases, like a registration for a site, you can populate certain fields and share your activity with this new site with your Facebook friends. This is where everyone is getting their arms up air over this privacy invasion. But if you want the convenience of not having to remember dozens of usernames and passwords, using one, like what you use for Facebook becomes convenient.

The other big discussion is around Facebook?s social widgets. These are actually less intrusive as one might think. They are what we call iframes, which means the ?Like? button that they just rolled out is actually a page within a page. The Web site that the ?Like? button is on actually doesn?t get any information about that person. So for me, I have the ?Like? button on this blog post. If you see other people who ?like? this post, I get none of that data. It doesn?t go into a database of mine, or into an email to me. Zip. Nada. What makes them attractive to Web site administrators, like me, is that it provides a level of personalization that I couldn?t achieve otherwise. And because Facebook is 500M strong, the chances are of that personalization working on my Web site is pretty good. The same goes for CNN and thousands of other sites which have integrated these new features into them.

The next time you think about your privacy and where your information is being shared, or even sold, think about he conveniences you have online when you use Web sites. You are giving up your privacy every day, but you are also willing to do so. In fact, if you really want to know who else is using your personal information just look into the fine print of the following:

  • Your Bank
  • Your Credit Cards
  • Your Loyalty Cards (Grocer, Movie Rental, Book Store)
  • Google Account (Oh, how quickly we forget about them)
  • Professional Association or Trade Association

You may be surprised on what you read.

What Facebook, Google, and Microsoft Taught Me About Culture

May 10, 2010 · Posted in Management, Strategy · View Comments 

I’ve looked into they eye of the beast, and what I saw was glorious.  I get the opportunity every few years to go visit a technology company through work with one of our Standing Committees.  This year we took a trip out to Palo Alto, California to visit Facebook.  Facebook has been a hot topic in the legal profession for a while, mostly circling their privacy changes.  We didn’t get a chance to debate those issues on this trip, but we did get to discuss how brands are using Facebook and how lawyers and law firms can take advantage of the platform.

While I’m not going to get into all the details of this visit here (that will come out in other posts) I am going to quickly talk about work culture.  I’ve visited three major technology companies over the last few years: Microsoft, Google, and now Facebook.  Each experience was different and I think that has to do with when they were started, what their focus is on, and how they execute their product.

New School vs. Old School. I think there are clear differences between old school vs. new school companies.  Old school is hierarchical with office space, titles and corporate environment.  They have high-walled cubes and offices with doors.  Microsoft is old school.  When I visited Microsoft you didn’t feel the innovation happening.  Maybe that was because it was in a different building than the one I was in.  When I visited Google and Facebook the environment was much different.  They have open spaces, collaboration areas, appropriate levels of distractions (like FB has a Guitar Hero room and ping pong tables). You could feel the magic happening.  You could tell there were smart people in the room coding ideas, sharing thoughts, working towards common goals.  It was energizing to be around and just observe.  People were excited to be at work and working on their projects.  It could also have been the fact that people were in jeans, walking around with Macs, working on 40″ monitors, etc.

Location, Location, Location. Maybe it is just being in Silicon Valley that is the biggest difference.  Both Google and Facebook are miles away from each other.  In fact, Facebook is practically in the middle of a residential district just outside of Standford University.  However I’d be willing to bet that HP, which is around the corner and was in the building Facebook now occupies, is a little more old school.  Microsoft, on the other hand, has a campus that has a highway that runs right down the middle outside of Seattle.   Impressive, yes, but still corporate in nature for sure.   However, it may not be your location.  I’ve also visited Total Attorney’s offices in Chicago and their set up is very similar to Google and Facebook, so maybe the Valley isn’t as critical as one might think.

Focus. While Google and Facebook haven’t been around for a decade yet, I think that is actually one of their prime reasons they are as successful as they are.  They are focused.  Every employee who works there knows how their project fits into the grand scheme of their company.  These companies have a focus (beyond profits), and that is something their employees embrace and motivates them.  They want to be the best, breaking new ground in their industry, and setting trends, not fads. Google lets their employees work on pet projects for 20% of their time.  This is how products like GMail, Google Talk emerged.  Those have then taken Google into directions they initially didn’t assume they would get into — office tools.  Facebook has a focus on transforming itself from a social network to a profile management and communication tool.  Products like their lists which help you categorize your friends helps you manage who sees what and what you communicate to whom.  It has opened a whole new door to the Social Graph for them — and how we communicate and share information.

Microsoft, on the other hand, is very diverse in their product lines.  They have several divisions: Search, Gaming, Office, etc.  and from a conglomerate standpoint, the act and operate like a big corporation — each division responsible for their own bottom line.  While Google has several product lines as well, their delivery vehicle is the same — the Web.

Photos from Facebook HQ

Photos from Google Visit

So while one may wear a tie to work and the other scoots around on a skateboard, think about how your company works.  Is it effective in producing your products and services?  Does every employee know how their project fits within the overall strategy of the organization? What changes could you make that would allow for better work product, focus, and commitment from your employees?   Maybe business casual is OK everyday.   It may depend on the profession you are in.  It may depend on experience and longevity of your management team.   My biggest take away from these visits is that your work environment and culture is very critical to the success of your company.

What is Facebook Really Up To?

May 7, 2010 · Posted in Social Media, Strategy, Technology · Comments Off 

Pete Cashmore, of Mashable, talks with Bloomberg about some interesting thoughts regarding Facebook, what they are doing, where they are going, and who they might be competing with.

I will have some thoughts on this and other Facebook stuff soon.

Knowing Your Audience: When to Use Tweets vs. Status Updates

April 20, 2010 · Posted in Marketing, Social Media · Comments Off 

In the world of social media, one of the most viewed pieces of content is the tweet or status update.  Updates and photos.  Those are the biggest social media traffic builders.  In fact, according to a recent PEW Internet study “Some 19% of internet users now say they use Twitter or another service to share updates about themselves, or to see updates about others.”  In addition to this stat, at Chirp, a developer conference for Twitter, it was stated that Twitter has over 55M Tweets per day compared to Facebook’s 60M status updates per day.  I first saw that stat come from Steve Rubel, a VP at Edelman PR and I immediately replied back what was obvious to me, “but how many of those status updates are really tweets?”  And there lies my problem.

For me, I use Twitter distinctly different than Facebook.  What I share with these distinct audiences is different, and purposely set up to be different.  In fact, I’m more likely to connect my Twitter and LinkedIn accounts than I am Twitter and Facebook.   You see, I use Facebook for personal reasons.  I don’t have two accounts like many people do (which violate their terms of service, you know that thing you agree to when you create accounts on sites that you most likely never read).  I leave my personal / professional network to Twitter and LInkedIn.  I often see people using the convenience of tools like TweetdeckFriendFeed,  or even just built in integrations between Twitter and Facebook (with a Facebook App) to update a status once and let it go to many social networks.  I think that is a mistake.

I know I’m not alone when I find a tweet in my news feed on Facebook annoying.  Twitter uses different protocols for replies and use of hashtags for topics.  While Facebook has attempted to incorporate the @ symbol as well, to be frank, I just think that audience doesn’t get it, and that’s why it isn’t used.  I also think the way people tweet, at times linking people to other content, websites, or replies to people is different than how people publish status updates on Facebook.  This makes for a very disjointed news feed.  It has gotten to the point that I’m about to “unfriend” all my Facebook friends who integrate the two together.  I’m sorry, it just doesn’t work for me.

Presumably you use your networks differently as well.  Maybe not to the same degree I do, but the people you friend on Facebook may not be the same people you follow on Twitter or connect with on LinkedIn.  So why send them all the same message?  Just like marketers have to segment and target their messages to get the most return on their investment, you too should be conscious about what messages you send to your networks.  You will have stronger networks in the end who will pay attention to what you have to say, not ignore you because the last 10 tweets had nothing to do with what you talk to your friends about on Facebook.

I never found out the answer to my question regarding how many Facebook status updates were really Tweets.  Maybe someone will publish that stat someday.

  • Quick Vote

    What do you think of Facebook changing from "Become a Fan" to "Like"?

    View Results

    Loading ... Loading ...
  • Tags

  • Stuff I'm Reading

  • Recent Comments