 "Photo: N/A")
Facebook has added a new twist to its ongoing tango with users’ privacy concerns, sending the Internet community into a mild frenzy.
The social networking site announced in a blog post Wednesday that it would test a new version of its “Publisher,” which would enable users to control who could see individual status messages and other updates.
Essentially, users would gain access to a drop-down list of groups — everyone, friends and networks, friends of friends, only friends and “custom” — that would allow them to choose who could see each piece of posted information.
“You may have some posts you want to share with a wide audience, such as whom you voted for or how great the weather is today,” wrote Facebook engineer Olaoluwa Okelola.
“Other times you may have more personal updates like your new phone number or an invitation to join you at your favorite restaurant for dinner that are meant for only close or nearby friends.”
Okelola wrote that the test version would only apply to users who have made their profiles public, but that Facebook administrators would soon expand the new feature.
ReadWriteWeb.com and other blogs and news outlets initially reported that the new Publisher could lead some users to make information public when they had not intended to do so, because all information would be set to appear as public as a default. However, ReadWriteWeb.com Vice President of Content Development Marshall Kirkpatrick wrote in a blog Monday that he had communicated with Facebook executives, who said that was not the case.
“We got the story wrong. We thought everyone’s shared items were going to be changed to public by default, but Facebook HQ e-mailed to tell us that only people with public profiles would see that happen,” Kirkpatrick wrote.
More than 600 people responded to the Facebook blog post announcing the change. Many reacted negatively, which reflects a trend in the way Facebook users have tended to view change. Past alterations to privacy controls — such as the “news feed” addition in September 2006 — provoked backlash from users who said the features encouraged stalking and breeches of information they believed to be secure.
Kelsey Rahmoeller, a junior from Grayville studying pre-med, said she thought the site might be trying to do too much. She said users might not adjust well to the projected changes and might be too impatient to alter the controls of each status update.
“I guess one point of view is you shouldn’t put anything on there that you don’t want people to see,” she said.
But Julia Garleb, a graduate student from Valmeyer in higher education, said she has been happy with the way Facebook manages privacy settings so far.
She said the new Publisher might make information a little safer, though it could add unnecessary hassle.
“They already have it now so you can pretty much make it as private as you want or as public as you want,” she said.
Neither of the students had heard about the changes, furthering Kirkpatrick’s suggestion that Facebook should advance the public conversation about its privacy agenda.
“Ultimately some more clarity around just what Facebook wants to do with privacy would be really helpful,” he wrote.
