Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Facebook Businesses Privacy Social Networks United States

Americans Less Likely To Trust Facebook than Rivals on Personal Data (reuters.com) 65

Posted by msmash from the tells-something dept.
Opinion polls published on Sunday in the United States and Germany cast doubt over the level of trust people have in Facebook over privacy, as the firm ran advertisements in British and U.S. newspapers apologizing to users. From a report: Fewer than half of Americans trust Facebook to obey U.S. privacy laws, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll released on Sunday, while a survey published by Bild am Sonntag, Germany's largest-selling Sunday paper, found 60 percent of Germans fear that Facebook and other social networks are having a negative impact on democracy [...] The Reuters/Ipsos online poll found that 41 percent of Americans trust Facebook to obey laws that protect their personal information, compared with 66 percent who said they trust Amazon.com, 62 percent who trust Alphabet's Google, 60 percent for Microsoft Corp..
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Americans Less Likely To Trust Facebook than Rivals on Personal Data More

Americans Less Likely To Trust Facebook than Rivals on Personal Data

Comments Filter:

  • Don't trust any of them (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Geoffrey.landis ( 926948 ) on Monday March 26, 2018 @09:51AM (#56327855) Homepage

    Probably a mistake. you really shouldn't trust any of them.

    • Re:Don't trust any of them (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Oswald McWeany ( 2428506 ) on Monday March 26, 2018 @09:55AM (#56327889)

      Probably a mistake. you really shouldn't trust any of them.

      True, the only thing that makes Facebook worse is probably that they are bigger than the others. They have more data and probably more business connections to sell it to.

      No one should ever use their real name on a social media account. Nor should they allow access to contacts, and other invasive permissions or give a social media company their phone number. Even better is not to sign up in the first place.

      • Re: Don't trust any of them (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Why is Apple not on the list? They and Google surely have much more data on you than anyone else on the list

        • Why is Apple not on the list? They and Google surely have much more data on you than anyone else on the list

          Apple and Google are certainly as bad as facebook, but harder to avoid if you have a smart phone.

        • google I'd say comperable to facebook. Apple, I just don't see. Apple has all the information for say.. almost half of smartphone owners. But to my knowledge they don't have half the "universally used" factors as google and facebook. Virtually everyone searches with google. Smartphones - Google and apple roughly evenly split the market Desktop Browsers: Google controls 60% of this market, with no other competitor breaking 20% Social media: OK googles social media sucks... but they actually have one. Web

          • Apple has all the information for say.. almost half of smartphone owners.

            Got it. Apple is safe, unless you own Apple hardware or run Apple software on your non-Apple computer (e.g., iTunes).

            • Well everyone's safe if you manage to completely avoid them... and they all more or less have data on everything of theirs that you use. I'm just saying, assuming all of them are harvesting everything they possibly can get away with, and purely off of the chances that people are using their products. google (they have trackers on darn near every site, and their array of products are so broad and almost universally used, you have to make a very very concious effort to avoid them) facebook (because 1. darn n

              • The title of thread to which you responded was "Don't trust any of them". Then you said:

                Apple, I just don't see.

                What's your point? Apple should be trusted? Apparently because they have a smaller user base? If you are a user of Apple products and Apple is mining your user data, I don't think it's much consolation is it? Oh well, they did mine my data, but since they only sold hundreds of millions of devices it's okay?

              • Well everyone's safe if you manage to completely avoid them...

                That's hard to do though. Google owns double-click that collects data from millions of websites. Apple and Facebook have their own advertising arm and collects data from millions of websites.

                Even if you always search with Duck Duck Go, don't own anything apple, and never had an Apple account. There's a good chance those three companies still have extensive data about you.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        the only thing that makes Facebook worse is probably that they are bigger than the others

        No, Facebook is rated lower because of the perception that they somehow contributed to Hillary not being elected. That was her election, she bought it fair and square. Facebook will never be forgiven.

      • > No one should ever use their real name on a social media account. Nor should
        > they allow access to contacts, and other invasive permissions or give a social
        > media company their phone number. Even better is not to sign up in the first place.

        Most smartphones come with facebook built-in to the carrier-bloat, and many of them cannot be rooted/reflashed. The Facebook app will be scraping your contacts list and various metadata *EVEN IF YOU NEVER SIGNED UP*.

    • Except Instagram, you can trust them over Facebook!

    • A comparative does not imply a positive. Saying that I trust A less than B does not imply that I trust B. It can well be that I trust A even less than B.

      If you're doing better, you're usually not exactly doing well.

    • Well, gosh darn it if they haven't just proven the availability heuristic yet again: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

    • When I signed up on FB five years ago, I provided my name and almost nothing else. Being well aware that they (ab)use your data to push marketing, I refused to provide them my home town, my employer, my vocation, educational institutions - NOTHING.

      For a while they would nag me to complete my profile and I ignored them. I finally gave them false information, listing vocation as Expert Crash Test Dummy and employer as I Work At An Office. Even filled pronunciation of my last name as throat warbler mangr

  • To follow the law? Yes. The law to protect me? No. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by argumentsockpuppet ( 4374943 ) on Monday March 26, 2018 @10:01AM (#56327927)

    Breaking the law is bad business and it typically ends up costing more in lawyers and fines than following it would. That's kind of the point.

    But who thinks the laws protect their private data? You click EULAs with these companies agreeing that they can do what they want and that you can't sue them for it. The laws protect the companies, if they didn't, they'd get new laws.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by nwf ( 25607 )

      That's only true until your company reaches a certain size. Then you get a slap on the wrist of a few million, while you enjoy your hundreds of millions of ill-gotten gains. And, of course, you can use some of that money to change the laws so you never have to face punishment in the first place, since all legislative branches only really care about the people with money.

    • Not in today's scale - Back in the '90's when Microsoft was hit by the US DOJ for abuse of power, Janet Reno, US Attorney General threatened to fine Microsoft $1M per day. Purportedly as a response, Bill Gates laughed and quipped "let them, I make $1 million per hour!".
      The point being today, companies are hundreds of thousands of times larger. Companies make billions, a few millions in fines here and there is just a budgeted line item under "legal fees". As an example, look at Wells Fargo, robo sign

      • Today's business dollars are beyond any government oversight.

        You clearly misunderstand the PURPOSE of government oversight. It's purpose is not to control the abuses by the big companies, it is to prevent smaller companies from posing a threat to the big companies.

        Just look at the Dodd-Frank law. Crafted by the two men, Rep Barney Frank and Senator Chris Dodd, who were among the loudest voices telling everyone that nothing was wrong leading up to the 2008 crash every time someone tried to fix the problem before it blew up. They also provided some of the muscle to k

    • Really, talk to JP Morgan Chase, it's all part of doing business.
  • LOL, headline should be: "Americans less likely to believe in U.S. Privacy laws than the Easter Bunny".

  • Reuters/Ipsos online poll found that 41 percent of Americans trust Facebook to obey laws

    And 99% had their poll vote added to the data that Facebook keeps on them via "like" button. ;)

  • I hope nobody is wondering why (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Opportunist ( 166417 ) on Monday March 26, 2018 @10:10AM (#56327973)

    After years of changing privacy settings unannounced, flipping privacy switches silently, burying information about it in gigabytes of legalese, putting up smokes and mirrors whenever someone tried to find out just how much FB knows about them and even outright lying about accounts being deleted, and being generally opaque when it comes to what information they store about you, how and in what context, I hope that nobody is wondering why nobody trusts them.

    Not that anyone else that's in the data collection business is any more trustworthy, mind you, but FB pretty much went out of their way to flaunt how they pwn your data and how you can't do jack shit about it.

  • "Fewer than half of Americans trust Facebook to obey U.S. privacy laws".

    What in the hell is this survey referring to? The US doesn't have any privacy laws!
  • Look around you (after changing your heart), most non-teckies did not change at all regarding their Facebook behavior. Was a similar opinion poll conducted before the recent privacy issues, say a month ago, showing more trust towards FB?

  • trust seems to be irrelevant (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    They don't trust Facebook et al but they'll give them complete control over their information and therefore their lives anyway.

    Irrational to the last.

  • We privacy enthusiasts have been so hopeful about what may happen to Facebook's user count that if you all want to be in denial and think they're the only ones stealing you're data, fine. We will take what we can get. We know we're playing a long game. Just know, you always have a third option. There's no such thing as "less of the evils" when it comes to capitalism and computers. You just have to get out of your comfort zone and start looking. And if my uBlock/NoScripts is telling the truth, you don't need

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by pnutjam ( 523990 )
      Anyone here check out mewe.com? It looks like a nice alternative for those places that insist on using a social media platform, like PTO groups, girl scouts, etc.
  • I'm a bit shocked that it's such a big story now, but I realize most people still weren't thinking about the fact that they were the product with this scheme. Even now, you don't trust Facebook but you trust Google? That's crazy to me, but the typical response of most people is to love the new shiny, and once you've made that choice, you'll tell yourself any convenient story to keep that illusion alive, until you're faced with overwhelming evidence like this.

    • I realize most people still weren't thinking about the fact that they were the product with this scheme

      People aren't dumb. I think most people understand corporations need to make money and Facebook is a big company with vast expenses.

      • If Facebook has vast expenses, then they need to be CHARGING for that, which is what revenue is, the cost charged to produce the good or service.

        People are dumb because they don't understand what Facebook does with their information. As evidenced by this latest non-issue. Facebook as always sold your information. Facebook has always given too much access to your information. Happened back in 2012 by the Obama campaign. NOBODY complained. In fact member of the campaign gave a TED talk about it!

        • If Facebook has vast expenses, then they need to be CHARGING for that, which is what revenue is, the cost charged to produce the good or service.

          Advertiser supported businesses are as old as the universe and I don't think they are going away. You of course have a choice whether to participate.

          Happened back in 2012 by the Obama campaign.

          THANKS OBAMA!

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by RobinH ( 124750 )
            There's a difference between advertising-supported businesses of old, like newspapers and television commercials, and what we have now which is selling the data more than selling the eyeballs.

  • 1. how to delete facebook
    2. how to delete apps
    3. how to delete twitter
    4. how to delete instagram
    5. how to delete a page in word

  • Violating your privacy is Facebook's core business. Whether they are acting as the broker to sell advertising through their network or selling data to third parties, your private information is their product. The social networking service they run is the bait they use to get you to hand them your information.

    The electronic privacy laws in the US are fairly weak so there is a lot they can do without breaking them. Being surprised that Facebook invades your privacy is like being surprised that Ford continues

  • ....they're stupid enough to keep using it. Oh well!

Slashdot Top Deals

Your own mileage may vary.

Close