FACEBOOK began as a simple, fun tool to catch up with old friends and make
new ones. The communication platform has since morphed into something
else.
IF you think Facebook is just a tool to make new friends and stay in
touch with old ones - think again. Security issues, data breach, privacy
invasion and user abuse are all rife on Facebook today.
It has become a research tool for thieves, a platform to perpetuate hate
groups and expand political and social rows, among others.
Last month, Rebecca Javeleau, a British teen who wanted to celebrate her
15th birthday with close friends, created a Facebook invite. She had meant
to invite only 15 friends but the number of people who confirmed their
attendance reached 21,000.
Her invitation had gone viral simply because she failed to mark her
invitation "private". She had to call off her birthday party.
Police in New Hampshire in the United States caught up with some
"friends" who broke into homes after finding out that their victims were
away on vacation, based on their Facebook status updates.
Thousands of Facebook users have also become victims of "clickjacking"
attacks - hackers exploit the "Like" and "Share" functionality to trick
users into sharing malicious content with their friends.
Home users are not the only ones at risk, states a report by security
research firm Sophos.
Businesses and other organisations can be the victims of cybercrooks
using stolen employee information to their advantage.
A survey conducted late last year revealed that Facebook is the worst
security threat among all the social networking sites.
Why has the social networking site evolved to such a state?
Facebook's privacy settings, combined with the high volume of personal
information users post on their profiles, have opened doors for
exploitation, says Dr Adrian Budiman, a senior lecturer at Universiti
Utara Malaysia."The main appeal of Facebook is the ability to connect through personal
networks and attract members' contacts by publishing information that
matters to other people.
"In order to attract more members, it has to promote its services. If we
see a generic advertisement to visit Facebook, it may not be as appealing
as stumbling upon an old friend's personal photos on Facebook through an
unrelated Google search. This is the main reason why it is dealing with
many privacy issues. It gradually reveals more and more information to the
public in order to attract visits to its site."
He says users tend to forget that Facebook is a business entity.
"Even though we may use its services free of charge, we also sacrifice
something in return. Its business model is to attract as many members as
possible so it can promote paid services through advertising or games
applications."
Adrian says Facebook users generally want to contain their private
information among a pre-approved group of friends.
"But if this was implemented rigidly by Facebook, business growth would
be slow at best. Therefore, under the banner of being more social, they
opened up certain settings that allow the public to view the private
information of unsuspecting members to attract more users."
Adrian, who conducts research in the field of new media and culture,
says one of Facebook's main "violations" of privacy is the gradual release
of initially private information to the public network.
A disturbing privacy chart was published in May by Matt McKeon, a
developer at IBM's research centre for social software, which disclosed
the information that was gradually released by Facebook.
This peaked in April, where by default the entire Internet had access to
user's photos, friends, wall posts and other personal information. Only
contact details and birthdays were kept private.
"Even though users can change to a more secure private setting, by
default all that information was revealed. Users had to manually
reorganise their privacy settings, which many claimed was complicated.
"Only a small portion of savvy Facebook users tweaked their privacy
settings while the majority were unaware of the change and did nothing to
re-secure their default settings.
"Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg tried to remedy the situation in late
May by introducing what he claimed were privacy controls that were simpler
to use. He never openly apologised for the problem."
In University of Michigan's 2010 American Customer Service Satisfaction
Index, Facebook users surveyed rated the company in the bottom five per
cent. User experience was affected by privacy concerns, frequent changes
to the website and commercialisation.
However, Adrian says campaigns to protest the changes in Facebook's
privacy settings, such as the May 13 "Quit Facebook Day", has done little
damage to the very large user base.
David Lian, head of social media practices at a public relations firm,
says Facebook's growth has been explosive because of one simple fact -
people want to use the services.
"Facebook's mission statement is to help 'you connect and share with the
people in your life'. Status updates, location, likes, interests,
photos... these are things that are driving growth.
"The other reason is accessibility. With the introduction of services
like Facebook Zero, people can easily connect with one another as the site
can be accessed via very basic phones at an affordable cost."
He says as social networks become more integrated into our lives, the
idea of privacy is starting to shift.
"Eric Schmidt, Google's chief executive officer, once said there is no
such thing as privacy any more. Now, that might sound extreme, but it is
eerily reflective of the situation today.
"I don't think privacy is an issue for Facebook alone. It applies to the
entire Internet."
Should the government monitor social networking sites?
DR ADRIAN BUDIMAN:
"The misuse of social networking sites or new media in general is a
negative side-effect of progress. We have to see the bigger picture.
Social networking sites enable the masses to communicate and have access
to information like never before, which can stimulate productivity,
creativity and eventually growth for society.
"Monitoring and regulating new media is not the answer. People who
intend to use new media irresponsibly will find a way to achieve their
goals through other means. It's the normal users who will suffer from the
effects of excessive state intervention.
"Social networking sites contain both good and bad information and it's
ultimately up to the user to decide which one to believe and form an
opinion. Racial and religious insensitivity communicated through social
networking sites usually portrays a minority opinion and may not be
necessarily true. A good understanding of how new media works and a strong
moral education will produce better results than trying to monitor and
control technological progress."
DAVID LIAN:
"Monitoring is good because it will give the government a clearer
picture of the discussions going on online and provide a feedback
mechanism for it to better serve the people.
"Many companies already monitor conversations about their brands online
and are putting into place programmes to better communicate with these
audiences. I think the bigger challenge is how the government can use
social networks to add value to the conversation and actively engage
people on social networks."
THINGS I DON'T LIKE ABOUT FACEBOOK
"There are hackers who steal personal information and cyberstalkers on
Facebook. Accepting a `friend' request from a stranger could mean you are
courting trouble. Then there are those enticing links with the
clickjacking worm which tricks users into `liking' a page and unknowingly
spreading the worm to their Facebook friends. There is no control over our
privacy and data." - Nishant Nair
"Unless you specify `only friends', anyone can see your profile. You
will never know who has viewed your page and what he or she will do with
the information. Universities are also beginning to use Facebook to do
background checks and gather information about students. Students have to
be extremely careful about expressing their thoughts." - Wan Faziati Wan
Sa'ar
"Hate and racist groups should not be allowed on Facebook. If it's a
platform to socialise and make friends, why then allow such pessimistic
groups? I am cautious about `friend' request from strangers and people
with fake names trying to be friends. I also don't like to be tagged in
photos that I'm not in or for events I did not attend. Some people are so
eager to show that they have attended a major event that they quickly tag
all their friends so that they (their friends) can view the photos." -
Afiq Hanif
"It is easy to hijack user accounts and post incriminating messages on
friends' walls and upload damaging photos. Some people like to post
offensive images of their friends without thinking about the
repercussions. Employers wanting to know more about prospective employees
are searching Facebook and when they come across offensive content about a
candidate, they will have a good reason not to hire."
Renganayar. C . D (2010, October 10) Facebook In, Facebook Out.
The New Straits Times
No comments:
Post a Comment