A case study of Facebook for faces
Introduction
Protection of user data has been a big issue surrounding tech companies, especially Facebook, that has been on the receiving end of criticism and allegations of misusing user data. The company has been accused of selling user data to paying companies that use its site for advertisement purposes, curtailing the privacy of user data. The company has an average of 2.3 billion users across the globe, and this translates into the proportionality of the data amount Facebook handles, drawing concerns on the safety of user data. Facebook is a large tech company that mostly turns over its revenue from advertising, and as such, user data comes in handy when hyper-targeting anonymized users for paying marketers. Giving users the ability to dictate how their data is used on such platforms will minimize the doubts surrounding what Facebook does with user data.
Background
Facebook is an American online social media and social networking service company based in Menlo Park, California. It was founded by Mark Zuckerberg, along with fellow Harvard College student and roommate Eduardo Saverin, (Gonzalez, 2016). When users log onto platforms like Facebook, which is a social networking site, they engage in various activities like posting photos and places they have visited. Through the data that is uploaded to this site, it is easier for Facebook to determine what kind of things people like. It is through this tool that Facebook sells the information to marketers who market their products through the platform. As of 2019, Facebook has a record 2.3 billion active monthly users, and it is a publishing platform that gathers user data for the benefit of its marketers who, as of last year, gave Facebook a revenue turnover of more than $56 billion.
The growth of the social media site has seen a downward trend with the core business of the company reducing slowly due to competition and a string of regulations from the central government and others outside the united states. Facebook faced significant negative publicity, especially after the presidential elections that saw Donald Trump being elected the president. The company was accused of selling user data to a company Cambridge Analytica, and it was the headline scandal of the year 2018 because the Cambridge Analytica company was accused of using the data for political advertising purposes (Zunger, 2018). Political integrity is an issue that, in a statement, Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg said that it would be on a top agenda on the four principles the company was aiming to accomplish. The scandal unearths another concern for people across the globe, especially governments, to provide regulations on how user data can be protected from exploitation. The concerns were visible when congress members questioned the Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg on how he was protecting user data from exploitation, and the extent to which user data was private (Hoffmann, 2018). It is hard for the fact of privacy of user data is being exploited by facebook by its purpose of selling the data to advertising firms to make profits.
The ability of a user to have a say into how Facebook uses its data is not currently an option available to Facebook users, and most people do not know how Facebook uses their information. Recent attacks, such as the unsecured data leak of more than 419 million Facebook users. The revelations have made people more concerned about how Facebook handles their data, and one of the most significant problems for Facebook CEO is to convince users their data is used responsibly by Facebook (Taplin, 2017). Even though there is mounting pressure, the business model of Facebook is not bound to change anytime soon because the platform is majorly free, and the users on the platform do not directly translate to revenue. The company can only work to ensure that there are measures in place to protect the security and privacy of user data.
There have been significant issues that have risen on the content that is shared by users on Facebook, such as graphic images and hate speech. As Zuckerberg says, “content governance is one of the four big categories that his company is endeared to fix.’’ (Zuckerberg, 2018). The comment shades light on the importance people has attached to ensuring sensitive content that might be harmful or portray specific individuals in a particular manner is controlled. The issue of content governance arose from the many hate speech comments and posts that were being shared by some individuals (Lee, 2014). The change promised by Facebook is not forthcoming because the difference for Facebook is a very thorny issue because giving users the power to dictate how their data is used is will mean that Facebook will have to consult users before they share their data with the revenue makers, advertising firms.
The issues surrounding Facebook have seen a deceleration in sales made by the company, and also the number of users in their money-making countries has reduced significantly compared to other years. The declining growth rate of Facebook from 47% in 2017 to 37% in 2018 is an indicator that Facebook needs to revisit its business model and due considerations to concerns by users about the privacy of their data (Meeker, 2018). The laxity of Facebook to conform to regulations and act on its pledge of making users can be attributed to capitalism. Companies dictate what their users consume ad are fixated on making profits rather than ensuring the concerns of their customers are adequately dealt with. Acting on such matters is based on whether such changes are in the best interest of the company. Capitalism has four different vital features, such as company policy, profit motive, competition, and private property. Considering these characteristics of capitalization, it is correct to conclude that Facebook is treating the company as private property, and change will come if only it will be beneficial for the company (Shaw, 2015).
Evaluation
The primary concerns in this case study of Facebook are the protection of user data, content governance, data privacy, and giving users control of their data. Facebook has not been entirely laying down the correct measure in protecting user data from exploitation by outside forces. Since the company went public in 2014 to date, it has had a significant number of attacks aiming at obtaining user data without the consent of Facebook. The latest attack has seen data of more than 419 million users breached. It is sickening the company has not been able to seal loopholes in its system entirely, and almost every year, user data is stolen and where it goes and how it is used no one knows. Jake Moore, a cybersecurity specialist at ESET, says that “it seems crazy that personal data of this magnitude could be on a server unprotected in 2019’’ (Edwards,2016). The statement shows that at this time of technological advancement, Facebook should have found a way to protect user data from exploitation.
Facebook has worked on content governance, and it is something it has been able to deliver on as promised because of various issues such as the exploitation of children and other materials that are deemed to violate its policies. Facebook developed an algorithm that ensures users only get newsfeeds from posts that are relevant to them. The development will help in reducing the number of children exploitation posts and posts that promote hate speech and other content that violates the policies of Facebook. The work of content governance has also been boosted by an increase in the number of employees at the company, and teams are dedicated to the monitoring of content and filtering out unwanted content from the social network.
The Facebook business model does not ideally give users the chance to take charge ad to dictate how their data is used. The user data Facebook has is sold to advertising firms, and it is through this that Facebook makes money. Giving users the authority over their data will mean that for Facebook to sell the data, it will have to first seek permission from the users before utilizing their data. It is an impossible task for Facebook to accomplish because it will potentially mean a decline in its revenue, and that’s why the issues of change do not correlate well with the company. The Facebook business model will not change anytime soon because the data they provide for advertisement firms makes it very useful in advertising on the platform, which is reflected by the billions of dollars the company gets in revenues from these advertising firms.
Privacy is something that everyone who shares valuable information is conscious about. The mining of user data and selling it to other third parties is not correctly protecting the privacy of user data by Facebook. There is no guarantee the data shared will not be used to exploit or take advantage of users or bring some harm to users. It has been hard for the company CEO to explain to users the safety of their data, and the company is responsible for the way it uses data provided by users. The sluggishness of Facebook to develop another business model where the key players who bring revenue to the company can still benefit has been a challenge, and that is why it has been difficult for the company to actualize change it keeps talking about every time.
Proposed solutions
It is usually hard for companies to actualize change that is not in the best interests of the company, and talking about change becomes rhetoric talked about day in day out without any formal action being considered. The government should step in to offer guidelines ad recommendations that can be used to manage how such companies use and store user data. There should be flexibility in developing business models in such a way that change cannot be hard to implement. It is hard for Facebook to make changes to its business model because it will bring complications in its way of getting revenue. The company should have in mind they have useful and confidential information and, when shared wrongly, can result in various problems that might include people losing valuables and in extreme cases losing their lives. The company should have systems that protect user data from access by parties that are not in partnership or business with it.
The solutions to these problems are realistic and adequate because when the government sets the regulations, it will force the companies to comply or be forced to through imposing of penalties for noncompliance. When the government formulates policies, these are policies that encourage moral responsibility for businesses, and duty is bestowed upon the stakeholders of the company. They have o way of making an excuse but comply with the standards. A good business model should be to incorporate the uncertainties of the future, and when change comes, it does not become a challenge but should offer transient to better offing in the future. Adopting a flexible business model is essential in making sure positive change does not become difficult to effectuate.
Recommendations
Capitalism only focuses on the company, profits, and competition and neglects crucial aspects of business such as ethical business practices and acceptable business morals that protect customers from exploitations and other potential risks associated with bad business ethics. The government needs to move towards a socialism economy where there are state-owned businesses that are controlled by the state and are easily regulated. The regulations of the country can well protect user data.
The company should find other means of generating revenue through sources such as e-commerce and online payments that will reduce its reliance on advertising to generate its revenues. As at now, it is hard to implement changes because it will interfere with its income. Finding alternative means to make money will make it easier to achieve the much-needed reforms that protect the shared user data from exploitation and uncertainties of the technological world.
References
Gonzalez, R. S., Amer, S. M., Yahia, N. B., Costa, F. D. A., Noatay, M., Qiao, J. H., … & Gardner, J. M. (2016). Facebook discussion groups provide a robust worldwide platform for free pathology education. Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine, 141(5), 690-695.
Zunger, J. (2018). Computer science faces an ethics crisis. The Cambridge Analytica scandal proves it. Boston Globe, 22.
Lee, N. (2014). Facebook nation. Total information awareness. Nueva York: Springer.
Meeker, M., & Wu, L. (2018). Internet trends 2018.
Shaw, W. H., & Barry, V. (2015). Moral issues in business. Cengage Learning.
Edwards, B., Hofmeyr, S., & Forrest, S. (2016). Hype and heavy tails: A closer look at data breaches. Journal of Cybersecurity, 2(1), 3-14.
Taplin, J. (2017). Move fast and break things: How Facebook, Google, and Amazon have cornered culture and what it means for all of us. Pan Macmillan.
Hoffmann, A. L., Proferes, N., & Zimmer, M. (2018). “Making the world more open and connected”: Mark Zuckerberg and the discursive construction of Facebook and its users. New Media & Society, 20(1), 199-218.