Mozilla Pulls Advertising from Facebook

An anonymous reader shares a report: Mozilla is not happy with Facebook. Not happy at all. Having already started a petition to try to force the social network to do more about user privacy, the company has now decided to withdraw its advertising from the platform. The organization is voting with its money following the misuse of user data by Cambridge Analytica, as it tries to force Facebook into taking privacy more seriously. Mozilla says that it is not happy to financially support a platform that does not do enough to protect user privacy. But the company is not severing ties completely. It says that advertising is being "paused" and that if the right steps are taken by Facebook "we'll consider returning."

Probably a net win

[SuperKendall]

From everything I've read, the value of advertising on Facebook is pretty questionable.

Facebook is so noisy normally, I'm not sure how people would even see ads apart from those annoying product adds embedded in the timeline view.

Re:

[gnick]

I'm not sure how people would even see ads...

Depends on the ad. A lot of ads are crafted to look like normal FB posts with only a small "Suggested App" or "Sponsored" identifier at the top to indicate that it's advertising.

Still not useful

[SuperKendall]

Depends on the ad. A lot of ads are crafted to look like normal FB posts with only a small "Suggested App" or "Sponsored" identifier at the top to indicate that it's advertising.

Right, but then it looks like a post - where the normal action is to scan quickly and move on. If an ad is not going to get you to click through, it's not very impactful as people's memories are terrible.

I've seen the exact ads you mention, while they are probably more useful than other kinds of ads I still doubt they have a large

Re:Still not useful

[gnick]

...while they are probably more useful than other kinds of ads I still doubt they have a large impact.

I wouldn't expect most forms of advertising to have much of an impact, but companies are putting out a LOT of money betting that I'm wrong.

Re:Still not useful

[tehcyder]

...while they are probably more useful than other kinds of ads I still doubt they have a large impact.

I wouldn't expect most forms of advertising to have much of an impact, but companies are putting out a LOT of money betting that I'm wrong.

There's an old gag about half of advertising spending being a waste of money, but no-one knows which half.

Re:

[tehcyder]

Advertising/marketing is about more than just specific click throughs. I don't suppose most people watching a TV ad for an expensive car immediately pick up the phone to order one, but there is presumably some point in the car company paying for those ads.

Re:

[Z00L00K]

There are degrees in hell too.

Re:

[goose-incarnated]

There are degrees in hell too.

Mozilla seems hellbent[1] on getting a trophy in each of the degrees of hell. They're so busy making themselves irrelevant that not advertising on facebook would barely register. Pity. They had a good browser once.

[1] See what I did there? :-)

Re:

[jimtheowl]

"There are degrees in hell too"

And a never ending argument about whether they should be using Fahrenheit or Celsius. Heaven is in Kelvin.

Re:

[Z00L00K]

I'd consider that we can't get truly private browsing until an inheritance scheme for all browser-stored data is used so that cookies for site X referred by site A are stored differently compared to if X is referred by site B.

And this applies not only to cookies but any cached content so X sees me as a new user for every new site I access that embeds trackers from X.

Re:

[tattood]

The loss of revenue may not have a big impact to Facebook. What will impact them is if other advertisers agree with Mozilla, and also decide to pull their ads from Facebook.

Re:

[mi]

BS. The distinctions Obama's bootlickers are trying to make in that article are without difference. There is nothing illegal or even unethical about Obama campaign's use of Facebook data, but neither is there anything wrong with CA's use of it. Can we use your FB-data for research? Yeah, sure. Ok, thank you...

Your article outright lies too. For example, its claim that

Notice that this was an invitation that came directly from the Obama campaign, which the volunteer could either chose to accept or reject.

is

Re:

[jenningsthecat]

Not a big pale Moon fan. The author is a dick.

I don't care much about that. Being a dick seems to go with the job, and Moonchild is FAR from alone in that regard among the people who head up major projects. What I care about is that I still have a browser that supports all the FF extensions I have come to rely on, along with a sane and configurable UI, instead of Mozilla's flavour-of-the-month-and-users-be-damned bullshit.

Re:

[rudy_wayne]

See this article: No, Obama Didn’t Employ the Same Strategies as Cambridge Analytica.
https://washingtonmonthly.com/... [washingtonmonthly.com]

Because the person who ran the Obama campaign says that what they did was different and OK.

Right.

Re:

[Quantum gravity]

The personality test collected information of users Facebook friends, and participants agreed to have their data collected for academic use.

Also the Facebook android app will download information about all your contacts if you agree to letting it find your friends. So you might have a shadow profile on Facebook even if you don't have an account, when your friend uses the Facebook app. And there is no way to opt out.

Mozilla Advertises ?

[Big Bipper]

Well I suppose not being on Facebook and running an ad blocker works, though as a user of Firefox, I wouldn't be a target anyway.

Re:Any group that suddenly cares

[Luthair]

There is a distinct difference between using Facebooks API collecting information about visitors while following the terms they agreed to and someone with access provided for research using it to slurp up data on everyone then proceeding to sell it. If you can't understand it then it suggests you don't have a grasp of ethics.

If you care at all about privacy you should be happy about the scrutiny, these are far from the only actors collecting data.

What ethics?

[tomhath]

There was no ethical difference to users when Facebook slurped up data and sold it to Democrats versus when Cambridge Analytics slurped up data and sold it to Republicans.

Sure there was a difference to Facebook, but to the rest of us it's the same thing.

Re:

[Luthair]

Of course it does, one falls under Facebooks vague terms of service and one is likely outside it, and possibly local laws.

Re:

[oh_my_080980980]

You don't have a grasp of reality. This is Facebook's business model. They sell your information. Credit Card companies sell your information. Cell phone Apps collect and sell your information!!

This has been going on for decades. But yeah act like it didn't happen before.

Re:

[Luthair]

You don't have a grasp of reality. This is Facebook's business model. They sell your information

Actually it isn't Facebooks business model, they don't make any money by selling your information. What Facebook does is sells access to your eyeballs and they're willing to slice n' dice the userbase based on criteria.

Credit card companies, magazines, etc. all do however.

I'm sure

[cascadingstylesheet]

I'm sure Facebook is quaking in its boots over that.

wait, mozilla advertises?

[swschrad]

guess that means they have a hit/recognition factor of 0. save your money.

Yeah, right.

[TheRaven64]

If Mozilla cares about Facebook's data mining, why do they have a Facebook page and links to their Facebook page on the Firefox page (and presumably other pages, I couldn't be bothered to check)? If they care about data mining in general, then why are they making it difficult to get the Android version of Firefox via any mechanism other than the Google Play store, why don't they just provide an F-Droid repository that users can subscribe to?

Privacy is important to Mozilla

[Kohath]

Mozilla Foundation will rely on illegally leaked IRS records for their decision-making. None of this Facebook stuff -- because privacy.

Facebook's business model

[Dracos]

Facebook's business model is analyzing and selling user data. They're not going to change it at all. User privacy goes against their core values, they only really support the illusion of it.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

...Oh, I bet they change quite a bit. As you said, their business model is selling user data... not giving it away for free.

From the FB POV, this essentially amounts to theft - no wonder they are bumping the security force and screening apps, etc. If your house was broken into and valuables stolen, you'd likely increase security, too!

Loose the noise---Loose Facebook

[shubus]

I did! You can, too!

Whole point of facebook is to BE public.

[Fly Swatter]

Isn't that why people use it? To put yourself out there to the public?

Or to put it another way, those that want privacy don't use facebook.

The whole point of Facebook

[nehumanuscrede]

is to hoover up as much data as they can and make a profit from it all while pretending to be nothing more than an innocent Social Media platform where friends and family can keep in touch.

I'm curious what " privacy " can reasonably be expected or even demanded from such an entity whose sole purpose is information brokerage ?

Good!

[DaMattster]

This is a move worthy of applause!

The hypocrisy

[Khyber]

I find it funny that just a few versions ago Mozilla was doing privacy-invading shit, now they're calling upon Facebook to be more responsible with user privacy.

Give me a break.

too little

[beep54]

and too late.

Shocked, shocked to find, user data is being sold!

[mi]

following the misuse of user data by Cambridge Analytica

The same "misuse" occurred in 2012 [ijr.com], when it was hailed as Obama's genius [investors.com] and "mastery of Big Data". I don't understand, why anyone would use Facebook — and allow them to sell one's data — but to be suddenly scandalized by Cambridge Analytica's use of it is just blatant hypocrisy.

Re:

[Xenographic]

I'd delete my FB account over this, but... I never made one in the first place. Selling our private data has always been their business model and I've been using various extensions to prevent them from siphoning the info from me since the beginning because it was so damned obvious.

The real problem, though, is how they siphon your data from your friends & relatives and you can't do much about that because you never gave it to FB to begin with. So it's about 10 years too late to be scandalized by all th

Re:

[pointybits]

No, Obama didn't employ the same strategies as Cambridge Analytica [washingtonmonthly.com]

Every time an individual volunteers to help out – for instance by offering to host a fundraising party for the president – he or she will be asked to log onto the re-election website with their Facebook credentials. That in turn will engage Facebook Connect, the digital interface that shares a user’s personal information with a third party.

Notice that this was an invitation that came directly from the Obama campaign, which t

Re:

[mi]

No, Obama didn't employ the same strategies as Cambridge Analytica

Oh, yes, he did [time.com]:

because the more than 1 million Obama backers who signed up for the app gave the campaign permission to look at their Facebook friend lists. [...] More than 600,000 supporters followed through with more than 5 million contacts, asking their friends to register to vote, give money, vote or look at a video designed to change their mind.

a community organizing tool, which is pretty much the opposite of stealing data in order to e

Re:

[pointybits]

Oh look, it's on Snopes now [snopes.com]:

Attempts at "whataboutism" with a scandal involving social media and psychographics fail to acknowledge that Cambridge Analytica obtained data by misleading people.

... In the case of Cambridge Analytica, information was gathered from users and given to a third party under false pretenses. According to Facebook, University of Cambridge psychologist Aleksandr Kogan created a personality quiz which users could download in an app called “thisisyourdigitallife.” Kogan pres

Re:

[mi]

Oh, well, if Snopes finds a fault in Republicans, while white-washing Democrats, that's a real shocker... Every word must be true.

information was gathered from users and given to a third party

Bullshit — every campaign involves a multitude of "parties", who share the information. Each of those qualifies as "a third" party...

University of Cambridge psychologist Aleksandr Kogan created a personality quiz which users could download in an app called “thisisyourdigitallife.” Kogan presented the