Entries Tagged 'Google' ↓
October 31st, 2011 | Google, Legal Issues, Online Reputation Management, Privacy, Quick Hits | Rob Frappier
In today’s Quick Hits, we talk about the effectiveness of Internet tracking opt-out tools, an embarrassing Google glitch for Mitt Romney, and a pro athlete’s (mildly) scandalous tweets.
–
Opt-out buttons and other tools designed to help people stop Internet tracking may not be effective according to a new study. Quoting the Wall Street Journal, “instead of helping consumers limit websites, advertisers and others from collecting information about their web browsing behavior, the Carnegie Mellon University study found that the tools were more likely to cause confusion and, at times, accomplish the opposite of what the user intended.”
Everyone knows that Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum has a pretty bad Google problem, but it looks like Republican front-runner Mitt Romney has a Google issue of his own. According to CBS News, “when a Google user types the phrase ‘Romney can win’ into the search engine, its spell check function responds with the message, ‘Did you mean: Romney can’t win?’” The glitch is related to Google’s auotmatic spellcheck function, which the company says it is always improving.
New England Patriots Tightend Rob Gronkowski apologized to the Patriots organization recently after snapping a few photos for Twitter with an adult film star. In a statement Gronkowski said “I didn’t intend anything to hurt the reputation of anyone on the New England Patriots or on behalf of Robert Kraft.” Truthfully, the incident was pretty mild. The pictures weren’t inappropriate or explicit in anyway and the relationship didn’t extend beyond the snapshots. Nevertheless, the incident shows how pro athletes must always be mindful of their online reputations.
October 27th, 2011 | Facebook, Google, Online Reputation Management, Privacy, Quick Hits | Rob Frappier
In today’s Quick Hits, we talk about Facebook affecting students from getting jobs, a potential privacy flaw in Skype, and info from Google’s biannual transparency report.
–
According to a new report from the Information Commissioners Office, “four out of 10 students (42 per cent) are worried that personal details they have shared on social networking sites, such as Facebook, as well as elsewhere online, could blight their chances of getting a job… The ICO study has been released to coincide with the launch of its new ‘Student Brand Ambassador’ campaign – a nationwide project aimed at raising young people’s awareness of information rights.”
According to Google’s biannual transparency report, the company has seen a sharp rise in takedown requests from police and other government agencies. The Guardian reports that these demands “formed part of a 70% rise in takedown requests from the US government or police.” The report also revealed that the “US demanded private information about more than 11,000 Google users between January and June this year.”
According to Keith Ross, a professor of computer science at the Polytechnic Institute of NYU, Skype’s default settings leave users open to having their IP addresses tracked. According to Ross, “if you have Skype running in your laptop, then I or any other attacker can inconspicuously call you, obtain your current IP address and your current location without you ever knowing about it.”
October 25th, 2011 | Facebook, Google, Online Reputation Management, Privacy, Quick Hits | Rob Frappier
In today’s Quick Hits, the FTC wraps up its settlement against Google for the company’s ill-fated Buzz service. Also, we talk about online tracking, Facebook’s stance on search, and how to look good on LinkedIn.
–
Chloe Albanesius at PCMag.com writes that “the Federal Trade Commission has finalized a settlement with Google over its Buzz social-networking feature, which requires the search giant to implement privacy safeguards and submit to regular audits.” As Google continues to push its new social network Google+ into competition with Facebook, the company would be smart to look back to the mistakes of Buzz.
Someone is Always Tracking You Online
This article from the Calgary Herald discusses how advanced Internet tracking technology makes it difficult for Internet users to avoid being tracked, even when they’re offline. The author suggests that the only solution to this problem is privacy tools for consumers. Quoting the article, “It seems the tools to control our digital privacy and protect valuable personal data are not in our hands. Whether we use such tools or not is another matter, but the idea of designing privacy controls into digital products or online services is at the very least an appropriate consideration.”
Ethan Beard, the director of the Facebook Platform, recently criticized Google and other search engines for getting search wrong. According to the Telegraph, Beard “said that search needed to go social so that people could get really good product recommendations from their most trusted sources, their friends, as well links to sites where they can buy the items.” This is part of Facebook’s search strategy, as seen in the company’s recent shift to add streaming content from third-party apps into user profiles.
LinkedIn can be a great personal branding and networking tool, but only if it’s used correctly. This article from InformationWeek offers nine tips from hiring managers and executives on how to use LinkedIn effectively.
October 20th, 2011 | Facebook, Google, Privacy, Quick Hits | Rob Frappier
In today’s Quick Hits, we talk about Facebook and Google privacy, and why debt collectors aren’t allowed to contact debtors online.
–
Facebook is in the midst of rolling out a major redesign, and users aren’t happy about it. According to the New York Times, “a poll run by the social media news blog Mashable found that 75 percent of Facebook fans ‘hate’ the redesign. The new Facebook fared even worse on the poll site Sodahead, where 86 percent gave the changes a thumbs down.”
The Daily Mail writes that “debt collectors are to be banned from hounding people through social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter, a consumer watchdog said today. The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has updated its Debt Collection Guidance to reflect new methods of communication, to prevent people suffering the ‘stress and embarrassment’ of having their money troubles made public.”
At the San Francisco Web 2.0 Summit, Facebook’s Chief Technology Officer Bret Taylor said that Facebook’s privacy settings are easy to use. According to The Los Angeles Times, Taylor bases his statement on the fact that “the majority of people on Facebook have modified their privacy settings.”
The Telegraph writes that Google’s new policy for Google Analytics is a means of making more profit, not protecting user privacy. Quoting the article, ”[Google] has enraged digital marketers by announcing it will no longer be passing search-query data to websites when users are logged into Google accounts such as Gmail, unless you pay them via their Adwords marketing platform. From now on, when logged in, users who perform a search on Google.com do securely, using a protocol that encrypts their data, so that the owners of the websites they visit can no longer see what search terms led them there.” This change is being billed as a privacy protection for consumers but the fact that the info is still available if an advertiser pays for it demonstrates how Google really feels about personal data.
October 7th, 2011 | CyberBullying, Facebook, Google, Legal Issues, Online Reputation Management, Privacy, Quick Hits | Rob Frappier
In today’s Quick Hits, Facebook is hit with a lawsuit, Google adds some privacy features to Google+, and Barnes & Noble tries to swoop in on Borders’ customer base.
–
A Kansas man recently filed a lawsuit against Facebook alleging that the company violated federal wiretap laws by tracking browsing data on users after they logged off the service. As ABC News explains, however, the litigation may be unsuccessful because it is difficult to prove harm in these kinds of cases. Quoting the article, “Experts say the Kansas litigation faces an uphill battle since courts in the past have tossed out similar cases against Facebook and others filed under wiretap law, finding such computer cookies are not wiretaps. In those cases that do end up being litigated the plaintiffs typically lose because they cannot prove any harm.”
There is a movement among some privacy activists to reframe what constitutes “privacy harm” in a legal sense. Stanford’s Ryan Calo has been a leading voice in the debate over the meaning of privacy harm and was interviewed by the Wall Street Journal on the subject last year.
Slate’s Katherine Goldstein has an amusing and interesting article about how her father has been “stalking” her on Twitter. Since the author showed her father how to use the site, he has been monitoring all of her updates and responding to them regularly, leading to some embarrassment and awkwardness. The article presents an interesting dynamic that many adults are facing as their older parents adopt social media technologies.
The U.S. News and World Report reports that a handful of media companies have teamed up to raise awareness about bullying with a multi-pronged digital campaign. Quoting the article, “media companies such as CNN, Cartoon Network, Facebook, and Time Inc. have started an online anti-bullying campaign designed to raise awareness. The companies launched the “Stop Bullying, Speak Up” Facebook page to give students and parents a place to voice their support for victims of bullying.” The campaign hopes to increase the number of “active bystanders” by encouraging people who speak up about bullying when they see it.
In a bid to further establish itself as the social networking website for privacy-conscious users, Google+ has added a handful of new privacy controls. According to VentureBeat, Google now lets you disable comments on Google+ posts and lock posts prior to publishing them. Previously, users would have to share the post publicly, before setting up privacy restrictions. The change is relatively simple, but intuitive and reflective of Google’s apparent desire to make Google+ the anti-Facebook in terms of privacy and sharing.
When Borders went bankrupt recently, its competitor Barnes & Noble swooped in to buy the company’s customer lists for a cool $14 million. But in purchasing the e-mail list, Barnes & Noble has drawn the wrath of consumer watchdog groups who say that the bookstore chain’s opt-out notice to customers was too vague. Regulators asked Barnes & Noble to give consumers explicit control to transfer their information to the new company, but Barnes & Noble refused to use the requested language.
