Thread: What Happens to Your Facebook Profile When You Die?

Facebook's expansion triggers political backlash
By Michael Liedtke, Ap Technology Writer Tue Apr 27, 5:52 pm ET

SAN FRANCISCO – Facebook's plan to spread its online social network to other websites could be detoured by regulators looking into privacy concerns that have raised the ire of federal lawmakers.

Four senators said Tuesday that Facebook needs to make it easier for its 400 million users to protect their privacy as the site opens more avenues for them to share their interests and other personal information.

The Federal Trade Commission already had been examining the privacy and data collection practices of Facebook and other social networks, the agency confirmed Tuesday.

Then last week, Facebook announced a proposed expansion that irked Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., and, he says, many Web surfers who called his office to complain.

Having built one of the Web's most popular hangouts, Facebook is trying to extend its reach through new tools called "social plug-ins." These enable Facebook's users to share their interests in such products as clothes, movies and music on other websites. For instance, you might hit a button on Levis.com indicating you like a certain style of jeans, and then recommend a movie on another site. That information about the jeans and the movie might be passed along to other people in your Facebook network, depending on your privacy settings.

Facebook says all this will help personalize the Web for people. It stresses that no personal information is being given to the dozens of websites using the new plug-ins.

Still, it means that information that hadn't been previously communicated could get broadcast to your friends and family on Facebook.

And Facebook is indeed sharing some personal information with three websites that Facebook hopes will demonstrate how online services can be more helpful when they know more about their users. The sites with greater access to Facebook's data are business review service Yelp, music service Pandora and Microsoft Corp.'s Docs.com for word processing and spreadsheets.

Facebook users who don't want to be part of the company's expansion have to go through their privacy settings and change their preferences.

Schumer thinks the onus instead should be on Facebook to get users' explicit consent, a process known as "opting in."

"They have sort of assumed all their users want their information to be given far and wide, which is a false assumption," Schumer said in an interview.

Schumer sent a letter calling for simpler privacy controls to Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg. The concerns were echoed by Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo; Sen. Mark Begich, D-Alaska; and Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn.

Facebook tried to assure Schumer that its latest idea won't invade users' privacy.

"We welcome a continued dialogue with you and others because we agree that scrutiny over the handling of personal data is needed as Internet users seek a more social and interactive experience," a Facebook vice president, Elliot Schrage, wrote in a letter to Schumer.

Schumer called Facebook's response inadequate and said his staff planned to meet with the company Wednesday.

Meanwhile, the FTC indicated it will weigh into the debate at some point.

"Our plan is to develop a framework that social networks and others will use to guide their data collection, use, and sharing practices," said Jessica Rich, deputy director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection.

Schumer pledged to introduce legislation that would expand the FTC's powers over Facebook and other Internet social networks if the regulatory agency doesn't feel it has the authority to require more straightforward privacy controls.

The political pressure could undermine Facebook's ambition to create a more social, open Web that could make it easier to aim online advertising at consumers based on their presumed interests. Facebook would probably thrive in a more communal Internet because it has amassed a huge database of personal information since Zuckerberg set up its website in a Harvard dorm room six years ago.

If Facebook's plans pan out, it could change the way people think of social networking. Instead of communicating on a closed website, Facebook's users could interact with one another over the entire Web. More sharing could spawn more customized websites that look different to each person visiting, depending on their friends and preferences.

While Zuckerberg has likened his vision to an online nirvana, critics see another hole in the crumbling walls of online privacy.

Facebook is moving from being a social network about sharing with friends "to a service that is about collecting and sharing information about you with advertisers so they can more closely tailor ads to you," said Ginger McCall, staff counsel at the Washington-based Electronic Privacy Information Center.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100427/...ivacy_concerns

Facebook Faux PasWhen to Implement a Social Network CleanseApril 30, 2010
By Natasha Burton

http://glo.msn.com/relationships/unf...tory?GT1=49000

I recently did a cleanse. Not one of those juice fasts, where you get that fuzzy feeling behind your eyes and become so on edge you could stab someone with a fork — a Facebook friend cleanse.


Truth be told, I used to collect friends like handbags and spend more nights than I'd like to admit trolling through friends' friends' friends, looking for anyone I kinda-sorta knew, so I could add them. When I stopped going on Facebook, because I could no longer recognize most of the people in my newsfeed, I self-imposed a cleanse.


If you want to do one of these yourself, here are some potentially unfriendable personalities to consider:


The person you don't actually know anymore: If you're still friends with your ex-boyfriend-from-college's high school buddies or some girl you met at a party five years ago, you may want to consider unfriending. Scroll through your friend list to make sure you want everyone on it to know everything that's on your Facebook page. If you don't, unfriend.


The serial "liker": Having someone who “likes” everything you do isn't always as cool as it sounds (unless, of course, this person is your husband, boyfriend, best friend or mom). Likers are fairly harmless — heck, they can make you feel kinda special — unless they start to weird you out.


The actual stalker: Don't get me wrong, the harmless variety of Facebook stalking (browsing random friends' pages and photos) is one of my favorite pastimes, not to mention a good way to virtually catch up with someone. But, I've had many a female friend gripe about guys from their past bombarding them with unsolicited messages, comments and (eesh) pokes; then continuing said bombardment, even when the women don't respond. Facebook should be fun: Anyone who makes you dread logging in gets the ax.


The status-update abuser: I love status updates — both reading other people's and posting them myself. But there is a line. Updating ten times a day about the minutiae of one's daily life, one's baby's daily life or, yes, one's dog's daily life, can be downright annoying. If you're not sure whether to unfriend someone based on sheer irritation, try this litmus test: Do you get the urge to “hide” someone from your newsfeed? If the answer is "yes," unfriend them instead. The person is likely too wrapped up in his or her own life to notice, anyway.


The perpetual promoter: Pre-cleanse, I had a few friends who Facebook invite-blasted their networks almost daily to get people to come to their gallery openings, club-promotion events, etc. Sure, having to decline these constant invites (because they were largely from people I'd long lost face-to-face touch with) was a good way to practice saying "no," but the friends who use Facebook solely for self-promotion, don't necessarily need to be yours.


The bad photo tagger. Some pictures are better left offline. You know, the ones you thought were safe in your non-digital yearbook, until a “friend” did the old scan-and-tag to reveal that you rocked brown lipstick and khakis from Costco in middle school. These photos, while not good for one's pride, are no biggie. However, anyone who posts photos of you (past or present) that are obscenely embarrassing and could cause problems for you at work, or with your family, is really not your friend. Hit that "remove" button.


The awkward commentator: When you and your best pal swap inside jokes on each other's walls, this person randomly (and continually) writes things like “I don't get it” or “Please explain” underneath. This can be a little odd (and somewhat creepy). However, if the person is actually a friend, not just a Facebook friend, he or she may just feel neglected. Try paying some attention to their wall, so they feel more in the loop.


To avoid being unfriended yourself, try these tips: Apply the Golden Rule and don't tag people in photos who you wouldn't want to tag you. Also, think twice before status-updating about how sad you are that your cat died; call your best friend to talk about it instead. And do try to keep your ex-boyfriend-stalking under wraps. Always remember — everyone can see what you do on Facebook, even though it may feel like it's just you, your pjs and your laptop.


Who would you un-friend?

Facebook adjusts privacy controls after complaints
By Barbara Ortutay, Ap Technology Writer Wed May 26, 6:23 pm ET

NEW YORK – In Facebook's vision of the Web, you would no longer be alone and anonymous. Sites would reflect your tastes and interests — as you expressed them on the social network — and you wouldn't have to fish around for news and songs that interest you.

Standing in the way is growing concern about privacy from Facebook users — most recently complaints that the site forced them to share personal details with the rest of the online world or have them removed from Facebook profiles altogether.

Facebook responded to the backlash Wednesday by announcing it is simplifying its privacy controls and applying them retroactively, so users can protect the status updates and photos they have posted in the past.

"A lot of people are upset with us," CEO Mark Zuckerberg acknowledged at a news conference at Facebook's Palo Alto, Calif., headquarters.

The changes came after Facebook rolled out a slew of new features in April that spread its reach to the broader Web. Among them was a program called "instant personalization" that draws information from a person's profile to customize sites such as the music service Pandora. Some users found it creepy, not cool.

Privacy groups have complained to regulators, and some people threatened to quit the site. Even struggling MySpace jumped in to capitalize on its rival's bad press by announcing a "new, simpler privacy setting."

To address complaints its settings were getting too complex, Facebook will now give users the option of applying the same preferences to all their content, so that with one click you can decide whether to share things with just "friends" or with everyone.

For those who found it complicated to prevent outside websites and applications from gaining access to Facebook data, there's now a way to do so in a couple of clicks.

It's not clear whether the changes will quell the unease among Facebook users, which has threatened to slow the site's breakneck evolution from a scrappy college network to an Internet powerhouse with nearly a half-billion people.

"They've lost the users' trust. That's the problem," said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, an advocacy group. "In the earlier days, there was time to regain it. It's not so clear now. I think it's getting more serious than making changes and moving on."

Some of Facebook's loudest critics offered cautious praise but indicated the young company will need to do more to prove it cares about privacy.

Sen. Charles Schumer called it a "significant first step that Facebook deserves credit for," but added he'd still prefer that Facebook require users to actively turn on sharing with outside sites, rather than having sharing be the default setting.

For some users, the problem has been that the company has changed its privacy settings so often that keeping up with them became too much. Before Wednesday's announcement, Craig Mather, a 28-year-old graduate student in Portland, Ore., was already complaining of having to adjust his privacy settings every time Facebook comes up with a new plan.

"It puts us on our guard, where we feel like we are trying to plug a leak," he said.

For Facebook, being seen as a company people can trust with the personal details of their lives is key. Users will only share information if they have control over who sees it.

"The kernel of what we do is that people want to stay connected and share with those around them," Zuckerberg said.

Jules Polonetsky, a former AOL executive who now co-chairs the Washington-based Future of Privacy Forum, said the privacy concerns stem from Facebook's transformation from a place to socialize with friends into the "de-facto identity system for the Web." It's a big step. Facebook is no longer just a place to share photos and play "Mafia Wars." It's a reflection of who you are online.

Facebook has touted its culture of authenticity from the beginning. It asks users to go by their real names on the site, and it deletes obviously fake profiles.

Zuckerberg described his vision for the Web in April with "an old saying that says when you go to heaven, all of your friends are there and everything is just the way you want it to be." He challenged software developers, entrepreneurs and others to make "a world that's that good."

Facebook's lifeblood is advertising. It makes money by letting businesses target ads to specific types of users — such as 30-year-old single men living in Brooklyn who are interested in motorcycles and yoga.

Zuckerberg, who turned 26 earlier this month, says his vision is not about the ad dollars. He was 22, he said, when "Yahoo and Viacom and all these companies" were clamoring to buy Facebook, offering $1 billion or more. For a 22-year-old to pass that up might be kind of crazy, he acknowledged, but he said it shows "it's not about the money."

Even so, convincing people that sharing more is good for them has at times been an uphill battle. Users revolted against Beacon, a feature that broadcast people's activities on dozens of outside sites when it launched in 2007. Facebook gave people more control over Beacon before scrapping the program completely as part of a legal settlement.

More recently, Facebook has come under fire for a security glitch that exposed some users' private chats, and another that revealed users' information to advertisers in a way they could identify them, going against Facebook's own terms of service.

For Luke Finsaas, who is 24 and has been using Facebook since college to keep in touch with friends and family in Australia, whether the site's vision works out in the end is a matter of trust.

"It's incredibly brilliant but wildly terrifying," he said. "Google has been around for a while, and we know that they are pretty serious about privacy and protecting us. We know that they've got our back. But Facebook has had privacy issues in the past."

Google Inc. has struggled with its own privacy issues — most recently with its Buzz social media experiment and, particularly in Europe, with sending cameras into cities to take photos for its Street View map feature.

But users feel a deeper connection with Facebook, where they exchange not just messages and 140-character tweets but news of major life events and newborn baby photos. That means privacy concerns are heightened, too.

"Facebook wants to be the social center of the Web, and any social interaction that takes place on the Web they want to be in control of," said Debra Aho Williamson, a senior analyst at research firm eMarketer. "If its plan succeeds, that could be a big problem. They will have access to too much information."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100526/...NsawNwcmludA--

Facebook post gets Detroit-area juror in hot water
Mon Aug 30, 3:14 pm ET

MOUNT CLEMENS, Mich. – A judge removed a juror from a trial in suburban Detroit after the young woman wrote on Facebook that the defendant was guilty. The problem? The trial wasn't over. Hadley Jons, of Warren just north of Detroit, could be found in contempt when she returns to the Macomb County circuit court Thursday.

Jons, 20, was a juror in a case of resisting arrest. On Aug. 11, a day off from the trial and before the prosecution finished its case, she wrote on Facebook that it was "gonna be fun to tell the defendant they're guilty."

The post was discovered by defense lawyer Saleema Sheikh's son.

Circuit Judge Diane Druzinski confronted Jons the next day and replaced her with an alternate. "You don't know how disturbing this is," Druzinski said, according to The Macomb Daily.

A message seeking comment was left for Jons on Monday. "I would like to see her get some jail time, nothing major, a few hours or overnight," Sheikh said. "This is the jury system. People need to know how important it is."

Sheikh's son, Jaxon Goodman, discovered the comment while checking jurors' names on the Internet. He works in his mother's law office. "I'm really proud of him," Sheikh said.

Without Jons, the jury convicted Sheikh's client of a felony but couldn't agree on a separate misdemeanor charge.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100830/...FjZWJvb2twb3N0

They used to teach civics, a course that taught citizenship but that was when public education stressed responsibility in the 12 years of preparing a child for college or a job.

Those days are gone.

--

What Your Facebook Profile May Be Telling ID Thieves
Seemingly harmless information can help ID thieves unlock key to your identity.
by Jennifer Waters
Monday, January 10, 2011

http://finance.yahoo.com/family-home...es-m-article-a

Your pet's name is a fraudster's best friend.

You may think you're revealing precious little when you tell your Facebook friends that you're dressing your pooch, Puddles, in your favorite color, red, for brunch at Grandma's on Sunday. But you've actually just opened a Pandora's box of risks.

The information consumers willingly, and often unwittingly, post on social-media websites can be a gold mine for fraudsters looking to steal everything from your flat-screen TV to your identity.

What's more, tidbits like your birth date, birthplace and the last school you attended are typically the challenge questions posed by bank websites and online retailers to verify your identity. "Despite all the awareness that people have about identity fraud and privacy on social networks, there is a disconnect between [that and what they are] disclosing in online space and social environments," said Thomas Oscherwitz, chief privacy officer for ID Analytics, a San Diego-based consumer risk management firm.

More than 24 million Americans 18 years old and older are still leaving their social-network profiles mostly public, meaning they aren't activating privacy controls that limit who can see their information online, according to a Harris Interactive survey conducted in October for ID Analytics.

The survey also found that nearly 70 million U.S. adults on social-networking sites include their birthplace — one of the most common security questions asked by financial institutions — on their profiles. "The information people are disclosing is not the entire piece of the puzzle but it's certainly helpful," Oscherwitz said. Thieves steal identities in pieces, he said, and layer them on each other for a clearer picture.

The information consumers willingly, and often unwittingly, post on social-media websites can be a gold mine for fraudsters looking to steal everything from your flat-screen TV to your identity.

What's more, tidbits like your birth date, birthplace and the last school you attended are typically the challenge questions posed by bank websites and online retailers to verify your identity. "Despite all the awareness that people have about identity fraud and privacy on social networks, there is a disconnect between [that and what they are] disclosing in online space and social environments," said Thomas Oscherwitz, chief privacy officer for ID Analytics, a San Diego-based consumer risk management firm.

More than 24 million Americans 18 years old and older are still leaving their social-network profiles mostly public, meaning they aren't activating privacy controls that limit who can see their information online, according to a Harris Interactive survey conducted in October for ID Analytics.

The survey also found that nearly 70 million U.S. adults on social-networking sites include their birthplace — one of the most common security questions asked by financial institutions — on their profiles. "The information people are disclosing is not the entire piece of the puzzle but it's certainly helpful," Oscherwitz said. Thieves steal identities in pieces, he said, and layer them on each other for a clearer picture.

Tips to Stay Safe

Here's some advice from Sileo, who wrote the "Facebook Safety Survival Guide," about protecting online privacy on all social-networking sites:

• Never post your exact date and place of birth. It's invaluable information to identity thieves, particularly when the two are bundled together.

• Never post your address, phone number or email address. This is plum information to scammers and marketers who are looking for nuggets of your identity.

• Control who can see your personal information. Many social-networking sites have privacy features, but they change often. Know what they are, stay on top of them and restrict your page to your real friends, not friends of friends or someone you met in a bar.

• Limit information about your activities. If you must brag about a trip or a fabulous party, do it after the fact.

• Remember that what you post is public and permanent. Don't put up embarrassing photos that you wouldn't show your grandmother. Don't complain about your job or your boss. Don't say something to or about someone that you wouldn't say to his face. Don't threaten others.

• Know the four types of Facebook users: friends, outsiders, businesses and enemies.

• You should know exactly who wants to be your friend or is asking you to link into their network. Some people will befriend your friends to get to you or your company.

• Be wary of seemingly harmless quizzes. When someone invites you to take a survey, say, "10 Things Others Don't Know About You" or "My Favorite Things," it may be designed to harvest your data. The name of the street you grew up on or your favorite vacation spot could be clues to your passwords.

• Before you share any information anywhere online about yourself or your workplace, ask this question: What would the consequences be if this information fell into the hands of my boss, competitor or people who don't like me?

6 Things You Should Never Reveal on Facebook
by Kathy Kristof
Tuesday, September 14, 2010

http://finance.yahoo.com/family-home...al-on-facebook

7 Things to Stop Doing Now on Facebook
by Consumer Reports Magazine
Wednesday, May 12, 2010

http://finance.yahoo.com/family-home...ow-on-facebook

Maybe its just there way of helping you make new friends...with telemarketers...

Facebook to share your phone number, address
http://technolog.msnbc.msn.com/_news...number-address
Facebook is the slowly-warming pot of water and we, my friends, are the frog. By the time we noticed our peeling skin, another hunk of our privacy is long gone.

"Facebook will be moving forward with a controversial plan to give third-party developers and external web sites the ability to access users' home addresses and cell phone numbers in the face of criticism from privacy experts, users, and even congressmen," the Wall Street Journal reports.

Is anybody surprised? Really?

This is how Facebook rolls: Strip away a huge chunk of your privacy, cry "Our bad!" and roll it back when users and/or privacy advocates complain. Then wait awhile, and do whatever it is Facebook planned to do anyway.

Voila! Boiled frog.

"We expect that, once the feature is re-enabled, Facebook will again permit users to authorize applications to obtain their contact information," Marne Levine, Facebook vice president of global public policy, wrote. "However, we are currently evaluating methods to further enhance user control in this area."

The statement is a response to a Feb. 2 letter from U.S. Reps. Edward Markey, D-Mass. and Joe Barton, R-Texas, who objected to the latest chunk of user info offered up to Facebook’s third-party developers.

"Facebook needs to protect the personal information of its users to ensure that Facebook doesn’t become Phonebook," said Rep. Markey wrote. "That’s why I am requesting responses to these questions to better understand Facebook’s practices regarding possible access to users’ personal information by third parties. This is sensitive data and needs to be protected.”

Facebook points out in its response that prior to activating a third-party application on Facebook (FarmVille, birthday notes, quizzes, etc.), users are presented with a prompt that describes the information they agree to share by using the app, and can choose not to authorize that app if they don’t want to share — that’s pretty much how it’s worked for a while, though true enough, many don’t read that for comprehension.

Minors especially don’t care about fine print, and to that end, Facebook stated that it’s considering "whether to enable applications to request contact information from minors at all. Further, "Facebook’s terms prohibit use of the service by minors under 13, and we employ various technical measures to implement that prohibition."

In a 29-page letter sent to the Federal Trade Commission last month, Facebook asked the FTC to consider consumers’ changing attitudes towards online privacy — increasingly "whatevs" attitudes the social network has had a large part in pushing for via its bit-by-bit dissolution of the privacy it once offered users and the "No biggie! We don’t care about monetizing your personal info! This is what’s best for you! We love you!" face it shows its users.

Last week, Facebook posted a draft of its simplified privacy policy to appease ongoing complaints about the counterintuitive and ever-changing mess privacy advocates have complained about for years. It’s pretty much the same policy that continues to push the boundaries of your privacy-sharing standards, but written in a way that’s much easier to understand.

"It is very good for companies to actually be making privacy policies easier to understand," Nicole Ozer, a policy director at the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California told the Wall Street Journal. "But users should be looking for privacy policies that are not only readable, but actually protect their privacy."

Well, I deactivated Facebook last week but before I did, I got rid of everything....pics, info, friends, everything. I just hope it was enough. LOL! I found that I didn't really DO much there so why have my info for them to do with as they wished.

I didn't list my phone number or address in the first place. It is a running gag that I change the info ramdomly anyway... this week I am "living" in Fuji ... thinking of a move to Germany next.

Teen cancels Facebook party with 200,000 'guests'
Tue Mar 15, 3:42 am ET

SYDNEY (AFP) – An Australian schoolgirl had to cancel her 16th birthday party after her Facebook invitation went viral and close to 200,000 people said they would turn up at her house, reports said Tuesday. The Sydney girl had wanted her schoolmates to attend, and the post -- which included her address -- said they could bring friends if they let her know, Sydney's Daily Telegraph newspaper reported. "(It's an) open house party as long as it doesn't get out of hand," she wrote, adding that she had not had time to invite everyone individually.

But within 24 hours more than 20,000 people had replied to the public event to say they were attending and by Tuesday almost 200,000 potential partygoers had reportedly accepted the invitation.

The girl's father, who asked not to be named, said his daughter had invited "a few friends" over Facebook but had initially been unaware of the settings required to stop strangers from viewing the information. "She was just anxious about whether anyone would show up to her birthday," he told the Telegraph.

Police said it appeared the girl's original post had been reposted by an "unknown person" and this had gone viral, as they warned of the dangers of advertising parties on social networking sites. "The father has given us an undertaking that he will have the Facebook page removed and the party will definitely not be going on," police Inspector Terry Dalton told ABC Radio. "There will be no party at that address. The only thing that anybody who turns up on that street will be met by will be some police vehicles patrolling the area."

In 2008, then 16-year-old Corey Worthington attracted global attention when he threw a wild party while his parents were away, after making an open invitation on his MySpace page. About 500 people turned up to his two-storey home in Melbourne, and in the ensuing hours police called in the air wing and the dog squad to help subdue revellers.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110315...hnologyoffbeat

Send them Charlie Sheens' house, he won't mind or even remember they were ever there.

--

Wait, so a teenager did something before thinking about the full consequences? Unprecedented.

---

No worries, mate. A Facebook "friend" is just someone that knows your name.

200,000 Facebook "friends" equals 5 actual friends (or less)

--

Hello that's 200,000 PRESENTS! I'd tell everyone to bring a present in one hand and a snack in the other. Okay, I'm going to say this again. 200,000 PRESENTS!

---

This is one reason why I think EVERY thing posted, inluding your basic info, etc, should be private by default. Private as in ONLY friends. And not be able to repost such events by default, too.