Welcome Guest | Sign In
ECTNews.com
E-Commerce Times TechNewsWorld CRM Buyer LinuxInsider
Discussions

TechNewsWorld Talkback

 
ECT News Community   »   TechNewsWorld Talkback   »   Re: Wallflower or Extrovert? Facebook Lets Users Choose by Post



Re: Wallflower or Extrovert? Facebook Lets Users Choose by Post
Posted by: Renay San Miguel 2009-07-02 12:25:16
See Full Story

With 200 million members who double as very vocal quality assurance officers, Facebook knows that any tinkering with its privacy policy is going to receive a lot of attention. So, its Wednesday announcement of an upcoming series of tests regarding its new privacy settings was carefully marketed as a matter of "control, simplicity and connection" by chief privacy officer Chris Kelly. "The power to share is the cornerstone of Facebook," Kelly wrote in the Facebook Blog.


Sounds like a good thing to me
Posted by: Lobster70 2009-07-02 16:33:59 In reply to: Renay San Miguel
I don't mind if they "encourage" me to share more--as long as I have the option to choose NOT to. Yes, uninformed users might end up sharing more than they want to, but doesn't that happen now? FB users need to be responsible for what they're signing up for.

I'm thrilled that I may be able to separate who sees what. Right now, I don't typically make friends with co-workers or my boss, or customers, or colleagues at other companies--I don't see that group in the same light that I do friends and family. Too many people have been burned by their employer learning something about them on a social network. Or noticing that they post during work hours (not that I would ever do that, of course...) But if I can segregate them out per post, great!

I have faith that the "very vocal QA officers" will do a good job making sure things are done right.
Jump to:
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Google+ RSS
Is native advertising good for journalism?
Yes -- It's a reasonable source of additional revenue for media outlets to support their traditional editorial efforts.
Yes -- Paid-for articles can contain useful information, but readers might bypass them if they look too much like ads.
Maybe -- But only if it's clearly labeled as paid-for content.
No -- I don't trust any information from media outlets that cloak paid-for content as objective journalism.
No -- Native advertising is confusing and devious, and it threatens the fabric of traditional journalism.
I Don't Know -- I don't understand what native advertising is.