When Instagram released a new privacy policy last December that suggested the company would sell users’ photos to advertisers without any compensation to the user, Elon University freshman Aurora Albi-Mercier was worried.
“I think not knowing if my personal photos, that I really only share with my close friends, were being shared with the rest of the world without my permission or compensation would have made me feel uncomfortable,” said Albi-Mercier. “Had they instated that policy, I would have felt pressured to take my pictures down and delete my account.”
Albi-Mercier is not the only one. After Instagram announced the policy change, more than half of its 16.7 million users deleted their accounts. Instagram returned to the original privacy policy soon after the debacle, but much of the damage carried on into 2013.
Instagram’s slip-up is only one of many social media scandals in recent years. Sites including Facebook and Instagram have attempted to monetize their products, often at the expense of their users’ privacy. Instagram’s recent controversy serves as a reminder of the struggle social media users face: walking the line between sharing their content and protecting their privacy.
“I agree to these terms and conditions.”
When Instagram announced its policy change, some of its users were outraged, and many were confused about how Instagram had the right to sell their photos at all.
“I didn’t get how it was legal,” said freshman Lauren Wallender. “I think it’s pretty unfair. I don’t post as much on Instagram, but it is your content, and it should be at your discretion to share it.”
It’s all explained in the terms and conditions agreement.
The Terms and Conditions page determines what a company, such as Facebook or Instagram, can and cannot do with its users’ content and its policies. It’s like signing a contract: It’s a commitment that users sign willingly.
David Levine, a law professor at the Elon University School of, specializes in intellectual property law and studies how it operates in the sphere in technology. He said Facebook users are at a serious disadvantage when signing up for an account because there is no contract negotiation involved.
“When you agree to the terms and services — their terms and services — you are giving up your right to negotiate those terms,” Levine said.. “What you’re giving up is a good amount of control for your privacy. You are trusting that Facebook is not going to violate a general norm in society when it comes to acceptable protections of privacy and change its rules mid-game.”
Without power to negotiate, users cannot fight against any changes that Facebook decides to make in its terms and agreement, now or in the future. Last May, Facebook introduced the new “Timeline” format, and with it, a few data policy changes that required information such as gender, profile picture and cover photo to remain public. Users who were unhappy with these requirements were simply told by Facebook’s blog site that they could delete their profile pictures and cover photos.
Similarly, when Instagram published their controversial public policy, the company was within its rights to make such changes. Just as Facebook utilizes its user information to personalize ads, Instagram could have taken its users’ photos, if not for the consumer backlash that cut their consumer base in half. It’s all in the terms and conditions.
But because of heavy legal jargon and length (Facebook’s terms and conditions page is more than 14,000 words), not many people bother to read the document. Levine said he has read research suggesting less than one percent of social media users read it.
“Only .11 percent of people read the terms and conditions on Facebook,” he said. “Of that percentage, only a fraction understands what they’re reading. That means 99 percent of Facebook users do not realize what they’re signing up for.”
Because of the confusing nature of the terms and conditions, many people have risen up to protest, forming websites like biggestlie.com and commonterms.net. Both these websites petition for easier-to-understand terms and conditions agreements. They also summarize the documents for those who don’t want to spend time reading.
“To Tweet or not to Tweet”
The terms and conditions may be binding, but concerned users can still protect themselves. Just hit “delete.”
“There is no foolproof, iron-clad way of protecting ourselves,” Levine said. “If you don’t like what a site is doing though, you can always delete. That’s why I don’t have a Facebook account anymore.”
But for many people, opting out of social media is not a realistic option. Its role in most people’s lives continues to expand and social media sites are gaining users everyday. According to a study by the Pew Internet and American Life Project, more than 90 percent of online teens participate in social media. Facebook itself recently passed over one billion users—nearly one-seventh of the population—according to Facebook’s website.
Many professions all but require Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn accounts, especially those in the communications field.
“Social media skills are some of the most useful today,” said freshman Meagan Darling, majoring in Strategic Communications. “And we can use social media to help our fellow students. It may not be necessary, but it’s another form of effective communication.”
If deleting an account isn’t a plausible or desirable option, users can stay informed of the changes that social media undergoes. It requires reading the new Terms and Conditions every time there is an update and learning how to use privacy settings effectively.
“With so many people able to Google your name and find you on tons of media sites, it is a little daunting, but also exhilarating,” said freshman Aurora Albi-Mercier. “Personally, because I've traveled and met friends from other parts of the world, I try to keep my Facebook open to the public so anyone can find me. It has made it easier to connect with other people, but it also means that I have to monitor what is seen on my Facebook.”
A site launched in summer 2012 called “We Know What You’re Doing” proves that perfect strangers can see what others post, depending on their privacy settings. Any publically-posted Facebook status is fair game and can be posted to the website. Statuses range from complaints about bosses to descriptions of personal alcohol and drug use.
The authors of these posts could have prevented the publicity if they had used their privacy settings, or had not posted it at all.
Levine said he believes that social media companies are listening to people’s concerns, because sites like Facebook and Twitter are businesses that want to gain customers.
“Social media are not oblivious to wanting to serve the community,” he said. “They want people to feel more comfortable about sharing more information, they want people to be active on their sites. And we are seeing a lessening of concern, broadly speaking, in privacy and sharing of information from the consumer as well.”
Graph Search ushers in the future
While concern may be decreasing, people still care about their information and who is seeing it online. In 2011, The INSEAD business school and the Oxford Internet Institute surveyed more than 5,400 respondents in 13 countries. Fifty-five percent of all respondents agreed that protecting freedom of expression and privacy online was important. Less than 50 percent believed that the Internet was a safe place to express opinions at all.
The newest concern is “Graph Search,” a Facebook feature announced mid-January that is currently in beta testing. Graph Search was given to a small percentage of Facebook users at random, and the company will open it to all users later in the year.
Graph Search acts a lot like Google. Users type in key words and phrases to discover friends with similar likes and interests. It’s like searching tags on Pinterest or Twitter, only it’s searches are much more selective and personal. Want to find married men in North Carolina who like prostitutes? Type it in on Graph Search and the engine will instantly compile a list of candidates who fit the bill.
If Facebook permanently installs the Graph Search, it will change how users find their friends and what information they can and cannot protect.
A Tumblr blog, “Actual Facebook Graph Searches,” spurred concern when it went viral and exposed the potential dangers of the tool. When Graph Search is eventually released to the rest of Facebook’s users, these concerns are likely to multiply.
“It sounds cool in theory, but you need to be safe online, and I feel like that is an easy way for predators posing as other people to find their targets,” said sophomore Jessica Edwards. “I only want to be friends with the people I know. I don't want to be spammed, and I don't want to be harassed.”
But Graph Search could also propel Facebook to the top, overthrowing Google and taking the throne as the new number one search engine. Graph Search can find people and places based on what users and their friends want and like, making it the most personalized search engine on the Internet.
Levine is more wary of the new Facebook feature.
“The speed and effectiveness of this search is of concern. Arguably, this material was already available, but not robustly searchable,” Levine said. “Now that it is, it will remain to be seen whether it violates any privacy norms as they exist in Facebook.”
Further speculation will likely arise when Graph Search goes into full effect. But users still are not completely powerless. Instagram pulled back when users protested its new private policy by deleting their accounts, and Facebookers can decide whether Graph Search is a desirable tool.
“Much of what you do on the Internet is voluntary,” Levine said. “No one is forcing you to get on Facebook or tweet, so you can still control your own privacy"