?

Log in

 
 
02 May 2017 @ 07:17 am
Ideal demographic  
Facebook told advertisers it can identify teens feeling 'insecure' and 'worthless.' The company made the standard statement for corporations faced with bad publicity: It never happened, and we will discipline the people who did it, and we will never do it again until the next time we get caught.

Thanx to [personal profile] andrewducker
 
 
 
Elenbarathi: Abandon hopeelenbarathi on May 2nd, 2017 05:22 pm (UTC)
What utter wank. I also checked out the related article, 'This oversteps a boundary': teenagers perturbed by Facebook surveillance":
“This oversteps a boundary,” said 19-year-old Jess, who frequently sees links to counselling sites on her feed. “Facebook should be a safe space and it seems they are trying to invade that.”

Maybe if 19-year-old Jess goes to a counseling site, someone will acquaint her with the simple truth that 'should' is a denial of reality: when people talk about how something 'should' be, they're actually talking about how it isn't: an ideal state that exists nowhere but in their own special brains.

Hello, Facebook is a private for-profit corporation, the sole purpose of which is making money. OF COURSE it tracks all the information freely provided by those who freely choose to use it. OF COURSE it uses that information to increase revenue in whatever way the law allows - and, note, in all this kerfuffle I'm not seeing anyone claiming that Facebook has broken ANY law.
"Ben, a teacher and father of four, wanted to know what Facebook was doing with the information. “If they are using it to target vulnerable teenagers for commercial purposes, then that is simply unacceptable,” said Ben, who like Jess did not want to give his last name. “Parents have a reasonable expectation that Facebook is not exploiting their children,” he said."
No they don't. That is pure wishful thinking. Both parents and non-parents have a reasonable expectation that ALL for-profit corporations are exploiting their users in every way the law allows, and some ways it doesn't allow, whenever they can get away with it. Caveat emptor! Oh yeah, and also TANSTAAFL.

The simple solution is the same one that used to be so efficacious at keeping teen drivers off the road: kids can have their own computers and Internet service when, and not before, they can afford to buy their own. Until that time, they can use Mom or Dad's equipment, with permission, under supervision, as deemed necessary and appropriate.

If parents CHOOSE to buy their minor children free access to the Internet, they need to accept the fact that they're also CHOOSING to expose their minor children to all the threats that lurk there - of which commercial exploitation through market research is hardly the most menacing.

(Sorry for all the edits; my typing sucks today.)

Edited at 2017-05-02 05:24 pm (UTC)