Facebook blames users because we shouldn’t have an expectation of privacy when it comes to Facebook groups (via Gizmodo).
[Sharenting is When You Over Share Your Kid Online]
Health Groups
Yesterday members of Congress asked for a briefing with Facebook because of allegations the company potentially misled users. People were discussing their medical conditions in closed support groups. Facebook blames them because a closed group is different than a secret group, and insurance companies were able to take advantage of the medical stuff they shared.
The part about Facebook blaming users comes from a statement to Gizmodo:
Facebook is not an anonymous platform; real-name identity is at the center of the experience and always has been. It’s intentionally clear to people that when they join any group on Facebook, other members of that group can see that they are a part of that community, and can see the posts they choose to share with that community. There is value in being able to know who you’re having a conversation with in a group, and we look forward to briefing the committee on this.
In an open letter [PDF] to Mark Zuckerberg, Representative Frank Pallone, Jr., chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Jr. and Representative Jan Schakowsky, chair of the Consumer Protection and Commerce Subcommittee, asked questions.
These groups were called closed groups and often had the word “anonymous” in their name, suggesting that information shared within the group and even membership in the group would be private…users of these groups shared deeply personal health information…insurance companies may have used information from these private groups to make decisions about insurance offerings for group members.
The committee demands that Facebook hold a briefing by March 1, 2019.
Andrew:
It’s behaviour such as this that prompted the UK’s parliamentary report to refer to FB as ‘digital gangsters’, a ring that feels entitled to act outside not simply of the norms of society, but the common interpretation of fair play and, indeed, the rule of law.
If ever there were an unambiguous and incontrovertible illustration of the need for independent review and approval of a consent contract, as well as external monitoring of that contract’s execution, when dealing with highly personal information that could have a deleterious impact on the consenter’s well-being, safety or even life, as is the case with such information in the medical profession, then this is it. That persons participating, anonymously by intent, in a closed group where they could share personal information which, if not kept confidential, and which if linked to their identity could have harmful social and medical if not legal consequences, should not expect that such information be kept confined to the group and remain anonymised is an unconscionable violation of personal and public trust that, if done by any trained and licensed personnel entrusted with such information, would be criminal.
And no, that Zuckerberg and FB being neither trained nor licensed to collect or manage such data does not make it better; it makes it worse. Far worse. There is a reason why these safety measures and protocols, since the Nuremberg trials, have been put in place, and with each of FB’s serial and wanton violations of those standards, they provide a textbook illustration of those reasons.
If, instead of a social networking and surveillance monetisation platform, Zuckerberg had created an airline, and lacking both training and licensure, flouted FAA regulations with the same abandon with which FB have flouted the standards for informed consent adopted and enforced by democratic governments worldwide, the public would appreciate the criminality of such behaviour and Zuckerberg would have long ago been imprisoned. Literally. Because we are having a harder time assigning a standard legal value to abstract assets to our safety and well-being, such as personal information outside of a medical-legal construct, and legislators are only beginning to grapple with it, FB and other predatory concerns continue to skate free and do more harm.
Of one thing I am confident; not only will this current state of play come to an end, there will be a reckoning that will include a reordering of this industry, ensconced within a legal and regulatory framework as an overdue public benefit.