Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


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

Sheryl Sandberg: Users Would Have To Pay To Opt Out of Facebook Ads (fastcompany.com) 223

Posted by msmash from the captain-obvious dept.
An anonymous reader shares a report: In an interview with Today airing Friday morning, Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg insisted that Facebook does not sell or give away user information, but made clear that Facebook's entire model is based on being able to share user data with advertisers. If Facebook users don't like its ad-based model, the only other option would be to have users pay for the service so they could keep their data to themselves. As Sandberg told Today: "Our service depends on your data, [so] we don't have an opt-out at the highest level. That would be a paid product."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sheryl Sandberg: Users Would Have To Pay To Opt Out of Facebook Ads More

Sheryl Sandberg: Users Would Have To Pay To Opt Out of Facebook Ads

Comments Filter:

  • that's correct (Score:5, Insightful)

    by iggymanz ( 596061 ) on Friday April 06, 2018 @02:44PM (#56393933)

    Users of facebook are the product. Don't like it, do what I did 8 years ago, and leave it

    • Re: that's correct (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Just like google

    • Re:that's correct (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Spazmania ( 174582 ) on Friday April 06, 2018 @02:52PM (#56394005) Homepage

      Seems reasonable to me. Pay with cash or pay with your privacy. Facebook is a business not a charity. No one forces you to use them.

      • Actually some websites do try to force it's use. And there are even employers who strongly suggest getting a linkedin or facebook account. I have one of those, but I'm not complying with their "wishes".

        • Re:that's correct (Score:5, Insightful)

          by chispito ( 1870390 ) on Friday April 06, 2018 @03:03PM (#56394101)

          Actually some websites do try to force it's use. And there are even employers who strongly suggest getting a linkedin or facebook account. I have one of those, but I'm not complying with their "wishes".

          Again, same logic applies. If my job requires me to have a social media account, and my job is not social media, I should find a new job. If a website requires me to log in with Facebook and provides no other method, I should find a new website.

          • sure, sure easy for young single person living in area with plenty of job opportunities to do just that.

          • just buy more money? You realize that's what you sound like, right? Getting a new job isn't easy in most places. Especially if you're one of the millions without a college degree or if you've every had anything go wrong in your life (major illness by you or family, arrest and conviction, House burning down, etc, etc).

            Telling people to just go find new work is all very bootstrappy and such, but let's not forget that the phrase "Pull yourself up by your bootstraps" describes an act that is literally impos

          • I just made a facebook account with a fake name, address and no friends/likes. Works fine to view social media and for logins.

            I also save at least an hour a day not seeing what my high school girlfriends sister did today, or what my friends had for lunch.

          • If an employer wants me to give them social media accounts, then I would ask for a second salary from the marketing department. I'm not going to spend my social capital selling my employer's product for free. Show me the money.

      • A paid model is the sensible solution (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward

        For one Facebook puts things in correct terms and makes a reasonable statement. Sandberg is spot on here: Facebook is a business and users need to pay up.

        The PROBLEM is that Facebook doesn't give users this choice. If Facebook rolled out a legitimate, contractually-bound option for users to pay a set fee and in exchange undergo ABSOLUTELY NO data mining, that would be both fair and ethical.

        But users are not given that choice, and until hey are, users should #DeleteFacebook

      • Comment removed based on user account deletion

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by rtb61 ( 674572 )

        Bullshit. They could simply do the ads tied to content with zero invasion of privacy. Why mine you digital identity, to manipulate your choices subconsciously, an extremely corrupt method of advertising. Everyone should not how shite Facebook are by now continue to use them and you deserve to be lied to and maniplute. Use Facebook as a company and well, for me, that's a black mark against you, liars deal with liars, use Facebook to promote products and it is a solid sign you can not be trusted. Shun compani

      • What do you think we are discussing here?

        And why the the most boring banality you just said is upmodded?

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      The new competitions to show how cool you are is to brag about how long ago you gave up facebook.

      • But I'm not cool, I didn't give up linkedin until Microsoft impending acquisition was announced, and that was quite recent. I filled my profile with garbage at that time, so the system would have a few weeks to have backups of and propagate utter bullshit about myself. Hint: the Vatican was one of the possible countries in the drop-down for experience.

      • Re:that's correct (Score:4, Insightful)

        by RonVNX ( 55322 ) on Friday April 06, 2018 @05:09PM (#56394961)

        Some of us have never had it to give up. And nothing of value has been lost.

  • Just give Facebook a big middle finger. Or use it as a trash bin - it's good for that, as the ads go, by definition, straight to the trash bin.

    • Just give Facebook a big middle finger.

      Oh, we all know Facebook . . . if you give them a big middle finger, they will sell it.

      I'd like a Congress Critter to ask Zuckerberg during his testimony,

      "Mr. Zuckerberg, would you sell private data from your own grandmother . . . "

      • "Mr. Zuckerberg, would you sell private data from your own grandmother . . . "

        Whether it fits your narrative or not, they don't sell your data. This is stated by them, but it's also common sense. Your data is their pile of gold. If they sell it it lessens their ability to profit from it.

        That's one of the reason you'll see them crack down on things like Cambridge Analytica: they don't want someone other than Facebook profiting from your user data.

    • Re:Even better (Score:5, Funny)

      by EvilSS ( 557649 ) on Friday April 06, 2018 @03:24PM (#56394265)

      Just give Facebook a big middle finger.

      And now they have your fingerprint...

      • Just give Facebook a big middle finger.

        And now they have your fingerprint...

        How could they do that when the gesture involves showing the back of the middle finger?

        • Re: (Score:3)

          by MobyDisk ( 75490 )

          Because odds are that the guy standing behind you taking selfies is a Facebook user, and Facebook data-mined their pictures. That's the trouble: you can't escape the watchful eye of Facebook...

  • This was the choice made in the last two decades (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Koreantoast ( 527520 ) on Friday April 06, 2018 @02:45PM (#56393945)
    For better or worse, this was the choice that consumers made back in the 1990s and early 2000s with regards to Internet services. Services gave different models, paid subscription or free with advertising, and most consumers, perhaps in ignorance of the risk (or simply not caring), chose the latter.
    • It should be pointed out that recently a lot of people are doing well with Patron. So there is at least one other model that works

  • No, Sheryl (Score:5, Insightful)

    by registrations_suck ( 1075251 ) on Friday April 06, 2018 @02:46PM (#56393951)

    No Sheryl. Another alternative is to opt out of Facebook.

    IMHO, it is the best option.

    • Another alternative is to opt out of Facebook

      . . .not really . . . as long as Kevin Bacon is still using Facebook, they are merely six degrees away from you.

      For folks who signed up and use Facebook, well, they gave their data away.

      But for folks who won't touch Facebook with your dick, but Facebook collects data on them anyway, because they are "real friends" with a Facebook user . . . that is quite nasty.

      If your name and telephone number is on the phone of a WhatsApp user . . . they've got you.

    • I don't have a Facebook account, should I also pay for them to stop collecting data on me? I'm not receiving any services from them.

    • it sounds dirty when I write it like that, but hey, if you're into Warhammer, D&D, etc you _will_ have a Facebook because that's where the meet ups are coordinated. Same with meet ups for computer clubs, the 3D Printer crowds, etc. Facebook took over what used to be done on usenet & bulletin board systems.

    • I look at porn that I am not really interested in, just so they don't know what kind of porn I REALLY like.

  • Arrogant much? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Kill it with fire.

  • #DeleteFacebook (Score:3)

    by xxxJonBoyxxx ( 565205 ) on Friday April 06, 2018 @02:49PM (#56393977)
    #DeleteFacebook

    "But, we need to do X because money."

    #DeleteFacebook

    "But we really don't do X."

    #DeleteFacebook

  • Payment (Score:5, Interesting)

    by b0s0z0ku ( 752509 ) on Friday April 06, 2018 @02:49PM (#56393979)
    Payment would actually be worse, since it would allow FB accounts to be tied to a real identity via a credit card or Paypal account.

  • Email STILL works with friends (Score:3)

    by BoRegardless ( 721219 ) on Friday April 06, 2018 @02:50PM (#56393989)

    Unless you need to pretend you are more than your real self.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by SeaFox ( 739806 )

      Facebook doesn't do anything a blog couldn't before. The difference is the mental barrier of entry for usage. Subscribing to an RSS feed is too hard for many people compared with just Liking someone, or doing whatever people do to start getting spammed with the other's updates.

    • Do you pay for your email? Gmail seems headed towards the same situation. Yahoo and hotmail already serve up unwanted ads to their free email service.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by antdude ( 79039 )

      But many people hate e-mails, IMs, etc. these days. :(

  • Nice privacy you got here, shame if something happened to it.

    What she doesn't say that you will have to continue paying for privacy in perpetuity for anything you share with FB.

  • They don't "sell or give away" your information, they merely "share it [sic]" ( with companies that pay them ) . See, that's clearly different. /s

    • They don't "sell or give away" your information, they merely "share it [sic]" ( with companies that pay them ) . See, that's clearly different. /s

      Who do you think you are quoting? Hint: it's not Sandberg. Here's what she actually said (I had to click through one more link):

      Sandberg said Facebook doesn't sell or give away its users' information to advertisers, even though "our service depends on your data." She said some businesses want to do "targeted ads" and have them shown to certain users, so Facebook does allow that — but she insisted no individual information is passed onto advertisers.

  • This not that. (Score:3)

    by fahrbot-bot ( 874524 ) on Friday April 06, 2018 @03:02PM (#56394097)

    ... Facebook does not sell or give away user information, but made clear that Facebook's entire model is based on being able to share user data with advertisers.

    And by "data" they mean "information" and by "share" they mean "sell" -- if that wasn't actually clear. So, that settles that. Thanks Sheryl.

    • And by "data" they mean "information" and by "share" they mean "sell" -- if that wasn't actually clear. So, that settles that. Thanks Sheryl.

      And you are quoting the article that's summarizing the interview (rather poorly), not anything from the interview itself. Here's the quote where that came from:

      Sandberg said Facebook doesn't sell or give away its users' information to advertisers, even though "our service depends on your data." She said some businesses want to do "targeted ads" and have them shown to certain users, so Facebook does allow that — but she insisted no individual information is passed onto advertisers.

  • I recommend Brave [brave.com] to everyone I know because it's as great blockers baked in. Works great on Facebook. I can't remember the last time I saw sidebar ads on Facebook.

  • dont even allow their domain to connect to your PC or laptop or mobile device, #DeleteFacebook

  • I just have to install the uBlock and Facebook purity extensions.....for free.....and the ads go poof!

  • Seriously, Sheryl - give people the option to pay for Facebook membership and guarantee that, with a paid subscription, a user's data will not be shared with anyone and excluded from Facebook's data mining.

    Feel free to price it to cover the lost per-user revenue - which I doubt is more than a few cents. Heck, charge them a buck a month and turn a profit!

    If Facebook did that, I would recommend that option to everyone I know who is unwilling to quit Facebook. I won't rejoin, but people like me aren't the norm

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by q4Fry ( 1322209 )

      Facebook "guaranteed" it would never share my birthdate after they "needed" it to make sure I was 13+. Then, a few years later, they started showing it without any change in my settings.

      Best case scenario: It turns into an extortion racket where they promise to continue not-selling your data as long as you keep paying the ever-increasing fees.
      Likeliest scenario: You pay them, and their solicitors decide that "a user's data" is different than "a user's (metadata|$anything_with_resale_value)," and sell you ou

  • Realistically, how much money does FB make off of showing me, personally, ads?

    How much would it cost me to submit an ad-buy, targeted specifically at me, and me only, that shows nothing but blank whitespace?

  • I've never used Facebook, but that's a deal that just might get me to join if I thought I could trust Facebook to honor it. Unfortunately for Facebook, I don't have that trust.

    • ...if I thought I could trust Facebook to honor it....

      That's the problem. Who can trust Facebook anymore?

  • Social media needs to be decentralized (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Virtex ( 2914 ) on Friday April 06, 2018 @03:35PM (#56394329)

    One major problem with Facebook (and other social media sites) is that they are built to be centralized. If you want to connect with someone on Facebook then you also need to be on Facebook. What we need is a decentralized social media platform built on open protocol specifications that can be implemented and reimplemented by different companies. That's how the web works. If the web had been built the way Facebook was built, you would need Facebook's special browser to view Facebook, Google's special browser to view Google sites, Amazon's special browser to view Amazon, etc. But because the web is built on open standards, I can run whatever browser I want to view their sites, whether it be Chrome, Firefox, Opera, Safari, or any other browser that implements the standard base of HTML, CSS, and Javascript functionality. And if I decide I don't like my browser I can switch to another and still access the web. Email also works this way. Don't like your email provider? Find another one and you will still be able to communicate with your friends. Sure you'll need a new email address, but it will still work. Or if you're technically inclined, run your own email server. That's what I do and I love it. But I could never run my own Facebook server because there are no options for me to be able to do that, nor would Facebook ever allow such a thing to exist because their entire business model is based on having complete control over your data.

    Having a common standard for social media would also go a long way toward eliminating the fragmentation in social media. Obligatory xkcd [xkcd.com].

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by novakyu ( 636495 )

      I found this completely decentralized social media system recently. As far as I can tell, everyone is on it (although you can't always easily search for them), and no one single entity controls it. It's called RealLife (TM) [tvtropes.org].

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by hansg ( 264039 )

      A new standard? Obligatory xkcd [xkcd.com]

  • And when will it be availble?

  • ...Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg insisted that Facebook does not sell or give away user information, but made clear that Facebook's entire model is based on being able to share user data with advertisers...

    Let me see if i understand her... Facebook does not sell or give away user information, but Fabcebook's entire business model is based upon Facebook sharing user data with advertisers. So what, exactly does Facebook get for sharing the user data from advertisers? Free pizza?

    • for sharing the user data with advertisers? ... So what, exactly does Facebook get for sharing the user data with advertisers? Free pizza?

  • I better start cycling to get those credits.

  • the only other option would be to have users pay for the service so they could keep their data to themselves

    1. Facebook has already given a massive amount of data over to advertisers already. Even if I start paying now, it's already too late.

    2. Facebook keeps shadow profiles on non-users, so how exactly would a non-user pay Facebook to protect their data? They'd have to sign up for FB...

  • Haven't you heard about ADP?

  • Let me translate all the corporate speak for you.

    FB:
    We're an ASS, Ad Supported Site.
    Our business model is collect as much data as we can about you and sell it to the advertisers.
    We don't care about you, just your data.
    You don't get to opt out because then we would make less money and that would hurt my quarterly bonus.
    Once you give up your privacy, you lose it forever. Kind of like a Sexual Predator Registry site for the masses.
  • Even if you paid them, I doubt they'd actually do it.
    Think about how often they change your settings without notifying you.
    Sometimes they change my feed from my choice of Newest First, to Most Popular First over a half dozen times a day.
    To be fair, sometimes they'll leave it alone for a bit over a week.
    Either way, they should stay the F out of my settings!

  • We can opt out of Facebook Ads for free... by opting out of Facebook.

  • Anybody that knows this and still has a Facebook app on their phone deserves everything they get.

  • Note : I've never had a Facebook or Twitter account, and never had any online social account in my real name.
    If they want me to pay to opt out, will they pay me to NOT open up accounts on variations of my name with false information. Will I get reimbursed for not tagging photos with false names ? Like the stainless steel rat said If you can't beat surveillance then overwhelm it. I wish I could make a mask of myself, and then have 2 dozen people where it around in areas with facial recognition software. It w

  • Yet they don't offer that Ad free no data sell subscriptions service. nothing has stopped them or anyone yet its not an option or offer. and second HAHAHAHHA as if they could be trusted ....Our idea of no ads and their idea of no ads wont be the same. The weather channel program advertised no ads and off course they had plenty of ads and partner links. Advertiser pay for eyes they WILL find a loophole or just make one.

  • Along with free/$0.99 apps. At the time Internet went mainstream, people were already accustomed to getting phone and TV bills with extra charges for things like long distance calls and premium services. We could charge a penny per article, $1.99/month for a social network and so on. $4.99 minimum apps could have provided an incentive to develop an app for a one time purchase without ads / in app purchases / cryptocurrency mining etc. Ad supported discount/free services could have still been available for l

  • While I never had a Facebook account and do not plan on having one, I can see the paid opt-out as a valid option since they do have to make money to survive. HOWEVER, that would only make sense if it comes with some hefty guarantees, or insurance if you will. The warranty cannot be just "money back for last x months of opt-out" since that simply turns it back to "we refunded your opt-in, therefore we own your data" model. Let Facebook state what the chances of mistakenly releasing the data are, and then sel

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • Facebook seems to think their product has more value to me than I have value to Facebook. That's incorrect. People like me who abandon social platforms early are the ones that start chipping away at the network effects that give Facebook their entire value.

    Facebook will have to remove ads and pay me to stay in order to maintain their network value.

    Facebook's on its way to becoming MySpace or Google+.

    Good fucking riddance.

  • I see the Trumpism you did there (Score:3)

    by kfsone ( 63008 ) on Saturday April 07, 2018 @02:51PM (#56398359) Homepage

    What advertisers pay Facebook for/get from Facebook is an ad-matching service, NOT your data.

    "Show my ad to 20-29 year olds in Boston who are members of the Red Sox Fan Club group. Here's the text and images".

    And finally, Facebook hosts the text and ads.

    Data given to advertisers: 0.

    [Full Disclosure: Facebook Production Engineer 2014-2016]

  • If I could pay FB a subscription fee in return for owning my own information then I might actually start using them. Their main hurdle would be to build up the trust they would need for me to actually believe their offer was genuine.

Slashdot Top Deals

"God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh." - Voltaire

Close