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

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."

Comments

that's correct

[iggymanz]

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

Re: that's correct

[Anonymous Coward]

Just like google

Re:that's correct

[Spazmania]

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.

Re:that's correct

[chispito]

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.

Re:that's correct

[RonVNX]

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

This was the choice made in the last two decades

[Koreantoast]

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.

No, Sheryl

[registrations_suck]

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

IMHO, it is the best option.

Re:#DeleteFacebook

[chispito]

#DeleteFacebook "But, we need to do X because money." #DeleteFacebook "But we really don't do X." #DeleteFacebook

It's so funny to use a hashtag to advocate a social media boycott. I do not think it sends the message you think it sends.

Social media needs to be decentralized

[Virtex]

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.