Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

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

Posted by msmash on 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."

33 of 223 comments (clear)

  1. that's correct by iggymanz · · Score: 5, Insightful

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

    1. Re:that's correct by Spazmania · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

      --
      Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
    2. Re:that's correct by iggymanz · · Score: 2

      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".

    3. Re:that's correct by iggymanz · · Score: 2

      that's the seventh time you've posted something like that. do you have an obsessive-compulsive disorder?

    4. Re:that's correct by chispito · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

      --
      The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
    5. Re:that's correct by RonVNX · · Score: 3, Insightful

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

    6. Re:that's correct by RonVNX · · Score: 2

      Sheryl Sandberg is a sleazeball. Do you really think Facebook would have hired her otherwise?

    7. Re:that's correct by easyTree · · Score: 2

      GP:

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

      P:

      How MANY FKCING times a day do I have to hear this stupid ** INTERNET MEME**.

      YES, we get it. STOP REPEATING THAT SHIT.

      Which part of GP's statement is the meme? That [s]he left FaceBook ?

      If not, sure, users are the product, as they are for magazines, tv, anything involving advertising revenue. Advertisers are the customer, your attention (you) is the product sold to the advertiser/NSA/etc.

      --
      Requiem for the American Dream
    8. Re:that's correct by Cute+Fuzzy+Bunny · · Score: 2

      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.

    9. Re:that's correct by reboot246 · · Score: 2

      They are not trustworthy. Even if you pay they could still do whatever they please with your data. If they're so devious that they would create "shadow accounts" for people who've never registered, then what makes anybody think they'll honor anything, including payments?

      I'm all for businesses making money. I'm invested in several businesses. Facebook is free to make as much as they can, but they're so dishonest that I'd never trust them as far as I could throw them. You're free to pay them if you wish, but in my opinion you'd be getting screwed twice.

  2. This was the choice made in the last two decades by Koreantoast · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  3. No, Sheryl by registrations_suck · · Score: 5, Insightful

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

    IMHO, it is the best option.

    1. Re:No, Sheryl by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 2

      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.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    2. Re:No, Sheryl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      You may not be able to login, but if any Facebook's cattle have your name and/or contact details stored in their address books, Facebook probably know who you are and where you live.

    3. Re:No, Sheryl by sinij · · Score: 2

      You personally can avoid contributing to it, but that doesn't help one bit..

      It is rather straight forward. If you personally don't contribute, then data on you only arrives from the secondary sources. If you limit web tracking by blocking FB and ask your friends not to tag you, then secondary data is very limited.

      Not submitting data to FB helps A GREAT DEAL.

  4. Arrogant much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Kill it with fire.

  5. #DeleteFacebook by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 2

    #DeleteFacebook

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

    #DeleteFacebook

    "But we really don't do X."

    #DeleteFacebook

    1. Re:#DeleteFacebook by chispito · · Score: 4, Insightful

      #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.

      --
      The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
    2. Re:#DeleteFacebook by gatkinso · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yet the irony is del.icio.us.

      --
      I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
  6. Payment by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:Payment by sinij · · Score: 2

      You could get a prepaid credit card in your dog's name, but then FB would know you are a dog.

  7. Email STILL works with friends by BoRegardless · · Score: 2

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

    1. Re:Email STILL works with friends by SeaFox · · Score: 2, Interesting

      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.

  8. It's not "selling" only "sharing" by Logger · · Score: 2

    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

  9. This not that. by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 2

    ... 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.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  10. Re:Even better by farble1670 · · Score: 2

    "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.

  11. Re:Even better by EvilSS · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just give Facebook a big middle finger.

    And now they have your fingerprint...

    --
    I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
  12. Social media needs to be decentralized by Virtex · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    --
    For every post, there is an equal and opposite re-post.
  13. Re: This was the choice made in the last two decad by jenningsthecat · · Score: 2

    No matter what you would have been sold out for a profit so it's best to not pretend and work on approaches to mitigate what companies can use.

    Came to say pretty much this. I don't trust ANY corporation, whether I'm paying them or not, to even apply good security practices to my data. I certainly don't trust them to not SELL my data - especially since they can sell it over and over again. And I really, really, really don't trust social media to not sell it, (especially Facebook), because selling other people's personal, private data is their business model.

    I also suspect that, in the aggregate, corporations pay WAY more to buy data, than people will pay to buy back their privacy. And if people do start paying in large numbers, then there will be a tipping point where corporations will consider the remaining available data to be worth less money. And if people who were paying to keep their data private stop paying for some reason, (or even miss a payment or two), then all their data is suddenly up for grabs again. So I don't think there's a snowball's chance in hell we'll see paid social media subscriptions. And if we do see them, we can be absolutely certain that the 'members' aren't getting what they're paying for.

    --
    'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
  14. Re:Even better by MobyDisk · · Score: 2

    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...

  15. Why can't the poor by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

    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 impossible.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  16. A paid model is the sensible solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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

  17. I see the Trumpism you did there by kfsone · · Score: 2

    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]

    --
    -- A change is as good as a reboot.