Last week, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg unveiled innovations to the social network goliath that are intended to spur the evolution of a semantic web. The goal is simple: to make the web’s default social, to ensure that (according to Zuckerberg) “People can have instantly social and personalized experiences everywhere they go.”
Logistically, this evolution is being made possible specifically through new social plug-ins, most notably via web-wide “Like” buttons, as well as a new “Open Graph” API. The “Like” button will enable Facebook users to express an opinion on a web site or piece of online content, immeditely transmitting that feedback to their Facebook page (and network of friends, colleagues, and business partners). Thus, as far as customer reviews and opinions are concerned, potentially every popular site on the web will be subject to (or, more positively, can benefit from) the opinions of Facebook users.
The new “Open Graph” API (application programming interface) will grant web developers increasing access to social data, which will eventually create a more personalized – and social – online experience. Techcrunch’s Erik Schonfeld explains the nuance of this development:
“Facebook has redesigned its Graph API for developers so that not only can they see the social connections between people, but they can also see and create the connections people have with their interests—things, places, brands, and other sites. Zuckerberg calls it the Open Graph (as opposed to the Social Graph). It is really an Interest Graph.
Facebook wants to developers to create subsets of the Open Graph around interests and things. Yelp might create one around restaurants, Pandora might create one around music, Netflix around movies. Add some “like” buttons and anytime someone likes a restaurant, song, or movie anywhere on the Web with a Facebook like button, that information will flow back into the Open Graph. So that Yelp will know what restaurants you and your friends have liked elsewhere and take that into consideration when giving you recommendations, or Pandora with music, and so on. (Yelp and Pandora are real examples, Netflix isn’t).”
Yesterday, however, a number of US Senators reacted to the privacy concerns that developments like these invaribaly raise. Democratic Sens. Schumber, Frankedn, Bennet, and Begich published a letter expressing three primary concerns:
1) Op-out dissemination of third party data. The way it is structured now, Facebook users’ personal information is automatically made public through the Open Graph API – the Senators argue there should be greater consideration for users’ personal information.
2) Third party data storage. “Previously, Facebook allowed third-party advertisers to store profile data for 24 hours. We are concerned that recent changes allow that data to be stored indefinitely. We believe that Facebook should reverse this policy, or at a minimum require users to opt in to allowing third parties to store data for more than 24 hours.”
3) Instant Personalization. The Senators expressed concern over the slippery slope created by the new personalization of data. Third parties not only obtain access as to a Facebook user’s personal information, but can learn information about their friends and personal networks as well. The Senators reiterate a desire to see Facebook designate this information sharing as opt-in versus opt-out.
What does this development mean for businesses operating in the digital marketing landscape? That they are trending in the right direction, and that with the right content and social focus, companies who engage now are poised to keep pace and stay ahead of their audience as search and social engagement becomes increasingly refined and personalized.
As to the Senators’ concerns, I’d argue that three arguments are each valid in their own right. Though I wouldn’t speculate as to any nefarious agenda by anyone at Facebook or any third party partner, it would seem highly appropriate for users to opt-in to sharing personal information, as opposed to having to opt-out. And while it will be incredibly difficult to enforce a 24-hour third party storage regulation, setting reasonable restrictions on data shelf-life would seem the appropriate course.
