Commentary

Facebook 'Like' Ads Not Privacy Violations

Facebook is doing exactly what it should in light of recent allegations that its "like" functionality is possibly illegal when utilizing a minor's profile to spread an advertiser's message. The social media powerhouse is staying closed lip on the topic and lobbying child privacy laws in its own favor.

By the sheer nature of what Facebook is and the privacy rights issues it generates, the company needs to vigorously fight lawsuits claiming its use of profiles to spread marketing messages are illegal.

Ultimately, it boils down to a freedom of speech issue and not a privacy rights issue. Advertising is protected under the First Amendment as long as it's not deemed fraudulent or deceptive.

The claim that utilizing a minor's profile in an advertisement is illegal is certainly open for interpretation by cross-referencing Facebook's TOS and pre-existing child protection laws. Parents who feel it is "illegal" for their children's likeness to spread marketing messages to their profiles connections are suing Facebook.

Not only is the legality of these issues in the grey area, the actual way in which these "advertisements" are being distributed by users profiles across Facebook are dubious and not entirely known.

In many cases, these "advertisements" are most likely not even considered advertisements, but Web content revolving around a product or service. It comes down to the user's choice to add content to Facebook. The way in which Facebook spreads that content is what is questionable, but certainly not illegal.

Facebook is essentially a content management system that allows users to upload content and share it with their connections. Facebook is revolutionizing advertising by providing marketers with unprecedented access to demographic and social interaction data. There is a fine line though, between sharing information and fooling users into thinking that their "friend" is endorsing a product or service -- when in actuality it's the company itself that is spreading the idea on a massive scale.

The "like" button is a way in which a Facebook user can show support for a Web site, product, or service that is Web-based. Including the terms "sponsored message" in soft grey lettering and attaching that to the image of a friend who has "liked" that page is apparently the line that is causing contention amongst parents and child protection advocates.

How far can Facebook really go in fooling its users into viewing and clicking ads that they might not necessarily be interested in viewing?

The relationships between Facebook users to promote advertisers' messages are akin to word-of-mouth advertising. If an advertiser wants to pay for that type of communication and increase its pages or site's visitors, it doesn't cross any lines. That is, unless users are unable to see a "sponsored message" alert next to that unit on Facebook.

When compared to commercial advertising, social ads costs less and the message is still transplanted to hundreds if not thousands of Facebook users. There certainly can be costs associated with spreading social ads on Facebook. For example, if a Web site is buying traffic to their site in order to get users to click the "like" button to further garner more traffic from the social network.

When comparing social ads on Facebook to other forms of commercial advertising (Google, Yahoo/MSN, television, radio, etc.), it's best to make Facebook social ads an extension of your more traditional media buying.

Social ads are providing companies with new options for targeting their pre-existing customer base and potentially new customers. Social ads are here to stay, and Facebook is set to dominate the space, as their "like" API is the preferred tool for Web developers to install on their sites.

Allowing Web users to "like" a Web page's URL and spread that message to their social networking contacts is revolutionizing the way in which we share and spread messages. Social ads aren't the Facebook privacy boogie-man that activists make it out to be; it's merely the complimentary and "next-stage" of evolution in which advertisers are using the Internet to connect with consumers and businesses.

1 comment about "Facebook 'Like' Ads Not Privacy Violations".
Check to receive email when comments are posted.
  1. John Grono from GAP Research, August 4, 2011 at 6:08 p.m.

    Hello Dale.

    Being from 'downunder' I don't know the intimate details of your Constitution. I notice that you say that "Advertising is protected under the First Amendment as long as it's not deemed fraudulent or deceptive".

    I was just wondering whether there was an equivalent protection of the American people's right to privacy? Sadly, here in Australia we don't have that right enshrined in our Constitution but it sure is being looked at.

Next story loading loading..