Mark Zuckerberg Spells Out a "Privacy-Focussed Vision" for Facebook After an Year of Data Scandals
Facebook turned 15 last month, but it's also going to be an year since the since the social network came under the scanner for a string of privacy blunders, set off by Christopher Wylie blowing the whistle on Cambridge Analytica data breach, raising concerns about its practice of gathering digital dossiers for commercial purposes and how it handles user information. Since then people's trust in Facebook has tumbled to an all-time low, with its user base declining by 15 million in the U.S. alone.
News Feed, Facebook's mint but also the primary source of its misinformation woes, became a tool for violence and authoritarianism in developing countries, an anchor that's upended the news industry, and a megaphone for extremists who are looking to broadcast and amplify acts of terror.
It's therefore not surprising that CEO Mark Zuckerberg has outlined a new vision for Facebook in a 3,200-word missive to "build a simpler platform that's focused on privacy first," shifting from public sharing to a more closed-off space where users can communicate with one another privately, betting big on end-to-end encryption, reducing permanence (but will the data get actually deleted?) and interoperability.
In other words, Facebook is becoming a lot more like... Snapchat. This marks a major reversal for Zuckerberg, who has consistently championed the cause of making the world more open and connected, noting that "a more open world is a better world," as the company filed to go public in 2012.
As oxymoronic as it sounds, it remains to be seen if this privacy by design approach will be rigorously implemented, or it's just some clever marketing spiel. After all, it's one thing to envision a private Facebook, and another to deliver it.
Given the company's abject lack of transparency when it comes to its data collection and sharing practices — Will it stop purchasing information from data brokers? Will it stop collecting information about users' online activities and tie them back to their accounts even if they are deactivated? Will it stop creating shadow profiles of people aren't even on Facebook? — and its poor track record with rolling out privacy-forward tools — the release of Clear History feature was recently pushed to later this year — the essay won't do much to help Facebook get out of the hole it dug for itself.
Studying at Harvard University and majoring in psychology, Zuckerberg and his cohorts devised the very idea of commodifying privacy, mining users' innermost thoughts, desires and connections for what amounted to an insanely lucrative cash grab, building a vast empire on the foundations of surveillance capitalism, a network so colossal that it's game over for rivals even before the game begins.
The move to privacy, it bears noting, is clothed in the language of contrition and openness. But if the future is private, that future cannot be Facebook — it's hard to find privacy on a website that's designed to extract and exploit personal information. If anything, Zuckerberg's newfound verbal commitment to privacy is very much at odds with the way the website currently operates.
What's more, it should not be up to Facebook to set the terms of what counts as meaningful privacy measures, not to mention the pivot is a sneaky way for Facebook to relieve itself of the responsibility of policing what takes place in private messages and groups. Bad actors aren't removed from the platform but given protection by a digital wall.
By pulling users into a closed network with end-to-end encryption that would exempt it from moderating fake news, propaganda, hate speech, and misinformation its platform disseminates, the move aims to shield itself from mounting costs and regulatory hurdles as it attempts to remedy its recent debacles.
However with Facebook's monopoly facing heightened competition from all-in-one chat app WeChat and intense scrutiny following years of privacy screw-ups, misinformation campaigns, and political polarisation — including calls for breaking it up into its constituent networks (Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp) — Zuckerberg's proposal to forge a new path forward through a tighter integration of its disparate properties couldn't have arrived at a more opportune time.
It's at best a self-serving, diversionary tactic that distracts and obfuscates the company's privacy missteps while simultaneously deepening users' reliance on the platform.
News Feed, Facebook's mint but also the primary source of its misinformation woes, became a tool for violence and authoritarianism in developing countries, an anchor that's upended the news industry, and a megaphone for extremists who are looking to broadcast and amplify acts of terror.
It's therefore not surprising that CEO Mark Zuckerberg has outlined a new vision for Facebook in a 3,200-word missive to "build a simpler platform that's focused on privacy first," shifting from public sharing to a more closed-off space where users can communicate with one another privately, betting big on end-to-end encryption, reducing permanence (but will the data get actually deleted?) and interoperability.
In other words, Facebook is becoming a lot more like... Snapchat. This marks a major reversal for Zuckerberg, who has consistently championed the cause of making the world more open and connected, noting that "a more open world is a better world," as the company filed to go public in 2012.
As oxymoronic as it sounds, it remains to be seen if this privacy by design approach will be rigorously implemented, or it's just some clever marketing spiel. After all, it's one thing to envision a private Facebook, and another to deliver it.
Given the company's abject lack of transparency when it comes to its data collection and sharing practices — Will it stop purchasing information from data brokers? Will it stop collecting information about users' online activities and tie them back to their accounts even if they are deactivated? Will it stop creating shadow profiles of people aren't even on Facebook? — and its poor track record with rolling out privacy-forward tools — the release of Clear History feature was recently pushed to later this year — the essay won't do much to help Facebook get out of the hole it dug for itself.
Studying at Harvard University and majoring in psychology, Zuckerberg and his cohorts devised the very idea of commodifying privacy, mining users' innermost thoughts, desires and connections for what amounted to an insanely lucrative cash grab, building a vast empire on the foundations of surveillance capitalism, a network so colossal that it's game over for rivals even before the game begins.
The move to privacy, it bears noting, is clothed in the language of contrition and openness. But if the future is private, that future cannot be Facebook — it's hard to find privacy on a website that's designed to extract and exploit personal information. If anything, Zuckerberg's newfound verbal commitment to privacy is very much at odds with the way the website currently operates.
What's more, it should not be up to Facebook to set the terms of what counts as meaningful privacy measures, not to mention the pivot is a sneaky way for Facebook to relieve itself of the responsibility of policing what takes place in private messages and groups. Bad actors aren't removed from the platform but given protection by a digital wall.
By pulling users into a closed network with end-to-end encryption that would exempt it from moderating fake news, propaganda, hate speech, and misinformation its platform disseminates, the move aims to shield itself from mounting costs and regulatory hurdles as it attempts to remedy its recent debacles.
However with Facebook's monopoly facing heightened competition from all-in-one chat app WeChat and intense scrutiny following years of privacy screw-ups, misinformation campaigns, and political polarisation — including calls for breaking it up into its constituent networks (Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp) — Zuckerberg's proposal to forge a new path forward through a tighter integration of its disparate properties couldn't have arrived at a more opportune time.
It's at best a self-serving, diversionary tactic that distracts and obfuscates the company's privacy missteps while simultaneously deepening users' reliance on the platform.
Comments
Post a Comment