Op Ed – Selling your Facebook soul to Goldman Sachs This month, Facebook announced it had made a deal with investment banker Goldman Sachs worth $500 million US. In his opinion piece below, Shawn Graham, a professor of digital humanities, asks who will profit from the deal and why you should care.
Arguments over Facebook and privacy have been raging ever since the site opened its virtual doors and invited in the world.
While the concept of privacy matters a great deal to some and less to others, everyone should at least be aware of how much of their information seeps through the cracks and into the public domain. I take my students to http://youropenbook.org and type in something a student might post.
Let’s take, “I hate my prof” or “I cheated on the test”. Facebook is porous (despite the privacy settings), and you would be astounded to see the number of people who act as if it were completely walled off. This usually has the desired effect of getting the students to at least look at their privacy settings.
But what’s the value of that information? What are you really giving away when you use Facebook? What and where is the harm in posting some pictures, updating your status, or “liking” a band?
You may or may not formally give Facebook your information forever – there is quite a debate over what the real implications of Facebook’s Terms of Service are. It is one that likely won’t be resolved without some court battles. Once information is posted on Facebook or anywhere on-line for that matter, it’s not going away, ever. What does Facebook do with that information?
Facebook is easy; it lets you connect with people, and share information. But that’s not Facebook’s business. Facebook’s business is making money – and you just gave it the keys to the kingdom by giving away for free your personal data that it sells to marketers.
Goldman Sachs, the investment bankers, tried to buy into Google’s IPO because they recognized the value of all the personal information that Google collects over time. Google recognized that its fortune and value was built on an implicit contract with its users: “use our service, and we won’t connect your surfing habits to your actual identity”. Because of that recognition, Google rebuffed Goldman Sachs: they would offer their IPO to everyone, regardless, because everyone made them successful.
Facebook is in many respects the Anti-Google, especially when it comes to privacy issues. For Facebook, there is no privacy (they see all and know all, even if you put up walls between ‘friends’), and they act as if they own all of your personal information (and perhaps they really do). Accordingly, Facebook has arranged a sweetheart deal with Goldman Sachs with regard to their upcoming IPO. Goldman Sachs opened a fund for investing in Facebook where the smallest investment allowed is $2 million.
Facebook took your information, and isn’t giving the vast majority of people any chance at earning something from it.
Are you on Facebook? If you are, a part of you is now owned by the wealthiest people in the world, who can do with your information what they will.
And you gave it to them for nothing.
http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/2969093/Facebook_Terms_of_Service
Ed Note: On January 17, 2011, PC World reported that Facebook was allowing third-party developers to access its members cell phone numbers and home addresses. Facebook has since reconsidered and says it will re-introduce the improved “feature” at a later, unspecified date.
Comments expressed in this piece reflect only the individual opinions of the author, and do not represent the position of Carleton University or members of its senior administration on the subjects discussed.