http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/05/opinion/sunday/facebook-is-using-you.html?_r=1&hp=&pagewanted=print

February 4, 2012
Facebook Is Using You

By LORI ANDREWS

LAST week, Facebook filed documents with the government that will allow it to 
sell shares of stock to the public. It is estimated to be worth at least $75 
billion. But unlike other big-ticket corporations, it doesn’t have an inventory 
of widgets or gadgets, cars or phones. Facebook’s inventory consists of 
personal data — yours and mine.

Facebook makes money by selling ad space to companies that want to reach us. 
Advertisers choose key words or details — like relationship status, location, 
activities, favorite books and employment — and then Facebook runs the ads for 
the targeted subset of its 845 million users. If you indicate that you like 
cupcakes, live in a certain neighborhood and have invited friends over, expect 
an ad from a nearby bakery to appear on your page. The magnitude of online 
information Facebook has available about each of us for targeted marketing is 
stunning. In Europe, laws give people the right to know what data companies 
have about them, but that is not the case in the United States.

Facebook made $3.2 billion in advertising revenue last year, 85 percent of its 
total revenue. Yet Facebook’s inventory of data and its revenue from 
advertising are small potatoes compared to some others. Google took in more 
than 10 times as much, with an estimated $36.5 billion in advertising revenue 
in 2011, by analyzing what people sent over Gmail and what they searched on the 
Web, and then using that data to sell ads. Hundreds of other companies have 
also staked claims on people’s online data by depositing software called 
cookies or other tracking mechanisms on people’s computers and in their 
browsers. If you’ve mentioned anxiety in an e-mail, done a Google search for 
“stress” or started using an online medical diary that lets you monitor your 
mood, expect ads for medications and services to treat your anxiety.

Ads that pop up on your screen might seem useful, or at worst, a nuisance. But 
they are much more than that. The bits and bytes about your life can easily be 
used against you. Whether you can obtain a job, credit or insurance can be 
based on your digital doppelgänger — and you may never know why you’ve been 
turned down.

Material mined online has been used against people battling for child custody 
or defending themselves in criminal cases. LexisNexis has a product called 
Accurint for Law Enforcement, which gives government agents information about 
what people do on social networks. The Internal Revenue Service searches 
Facebook and MySpace for evidence of tax evaders’ income and whereabouts, and 
United States Citizenship and Immigration Services has been known to scrutinize 
photos and posts to confirm family relationships or weed out sham marriages. 
Employers sometimes decide whether to hire people based on their online 
profiles, with one study indicating that 70 percent of recruiters and human 
resource professionals in the United States have rejected candidates based on 
data found online. A company called Spokeo gathers online data for employers, 
the public and anyone else who wants it. The company even posts ads urging “HR 
Recruiters — Click Here Now!” and asking women to submit their boyfriends’ 
e-mail addresses for an analysis of their online photos and activities to learn 
“Is He Cheating on You?”

Stereotyping is alive and well in data aggregation. Your application for credit 
could be declined not on the basis of your own finances or credit history, but 
on the basis of aggregate data — what other people whose likes and dislikes are 
similar to yours have done. If guitar players or divorcing couples are more 
likely to renege on their credit-card bills, then the fact that you’ve looked 
at guitar ads or sent an e-mail to a divorce lawyer might cause a data 
aggregator to classify you as less credit-worthy. When an Atlanta man returned 
from his honeymoon, he found that his credit limit had been lowered to $3,800 
from $10,800. The switch was not based on anything he had done but on aggregate 
data. A letter from the company told him, “Other customers who have used their 
card at establishments where you recently shopped have a poor repayment history 
with American Express.”

Even though laws allow people to challenge false information in credit reports, 
there are no laws that require data aggregators to reveal what they know about 
you. If I’ve Googled “diabetes” for a friend or “date rape drugs” for a mystery 
I’m writing, data aggregators assume those searches reflect my own health and 
proclivities. Because no laws regulate what types of data these aggregators can 
collect, they make their own rules.

In 2007 and 2008, the online advertising company NebuAd contracted with six 
Internet service providers to install hardware on their networks that monitored 
users’ Internet activities and transmitted that data to NebuAd’s servers for 
analysis and use in marketing. For an average of six months, NebuAd copied 
every e-mail, Web search or purchase that some 400,000 people sent over the 
Internet. Other companies, like Healthline Networks Inc., have in-house limits 
on which private information they will collect. Healthline does not use 
information about people’s searches related to H.I.V., impotence or eating 
disorders to target ads to people, but it will use information about bipolar 
disorder, overactive bladder and anxiety, which can be as stigmatizing as the 
topics on its privacy-protected list.

In the 1970s, a professor of communication studies at Northwestern University 
named John McKnight popularized the term “redlining” to describe the failure of 
banks, insurers and other institutions to offer their services to inner city 
neighborhoods. The term came from the practice of bank officials who drew a red 
line on a map to indicate where they wouldn’t invest. But use of the term 
expanded to cover a wide array of racially discriminatory practices, such as 
not offering home loans to African-Americans, even those who were wealthy or 
middle class.

Now the map used in redlining is not a geographic map, but the map of your 
travels across the Web. The term Weblining describes the practice of denying 
people opportunities based on their digital selves. You might be refused health 
insurance based on a Google search you did about a medical condition. You might 
be shown a credit card with a lower credit limit, not because of your credit 
history, but because of your race, sex or ZIP code or the types of Web sites 
you visit.

Data aggregation has social implications as well. When young people in poor 
neighborhoods are bombarded with advertisements for trade schools, will they be 
more likely than others their age to forgo college? And when women are shown 
articles about celebrities rather than stock market trends, will they be less 
likely to develop financial savvy? Advertisers are drawing new redlines, 
limiting people to the roles society expects them to play.

Data aggregators’ practices conflict with what people say they want. A 2008 
Consumer Reports poll of 2,000 people found that 93 percent thought Internet 
companies should always ask for permission before using personal information, 
and 72 percent wanted the right to opt out of online tracking. A study by 
Princeton Survey Research Associates in 2009 using a random sample of 1,000 
people found that 69 percent thought that the United States should adopt a law 
giving people the right to learn everything a Web site knows about them. We 
need a do-not-track law, similar to the do-not-call one. Now it’s not just 
about whether my dinner will be interrupted by a telemarketer. It’s about 
whether my dreams will be dashed by the collection of bits and bytes over which 
I have no control and for which companies are currently unaccountable.

Lori Andrews is a law professor at Chicago-Kent College of Law and the author 
of “I Know Who You Are and I Saw What You Did: Social Networks and the Death of 
Privacy.”

---
Just because i'm near the punchbowl doesn't mean I'm also drinking from it.

_______________________________________________
Infowarrior mailing list
[email protected]
https://attrition.org/mailman/listinfo/infowarrior

Reply via email to