The Instigator
12tafran
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Doulos1202
Pro (for)
Winning
6 Points

Is using social media such as facebook or linkedin for marketing an invasion of privacy

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Doulos1202
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/17/2012 Category: Society
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 5,681 times Debate No: 21217
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

12tafran

Con

Pro is no it is not invasion of privacy
Con is yes it is an invasion of privacy

Pro will speak first, I am Con

Marketers are looking for new ways for gathering information about target markets and increase product sales. By using Facebook and LinkedIn, they can use a new form of behavioral targeting much like a conversational eavesdropping analysis

format
Pro will speak first
Con will speak second
Pro rebuttal and voting issues
Con rebuttal and voting issues
Doulos1202

Pro

I accept this debate and hope that although my arguments will be short they will be effective in the eyes of both Con and the voters.

Whatever is posted on a public site such as forums or social networking should not be expected to stay private. Whatever is private is submitted by the "user". It is at and only at the user's discretion of what they would like available to the public.
It is not eavesdropping when you openly post information and updates about yourself. You have the option to privatize your profile and send sensitive information via email or message from user to user. To make it simple, it is on the user what they want to publicly post and seen by marketers. If you don't want your information gathered either don't put it up on public sites or privatize it to prevent marketers from gathering your information.
Debate Round No. 1
12tafran

Con

It might be true that when we post something on Facebook, we make it public. But we can change our privacy setting to only friends so nobody else can see it. That's where the problem lies. Marketers are still getting our information through Facebook, twitter, and other social media. There are proves that apps on Facebook such as FarmVille and Family Tree that leak identifying information to marketers. Also, when we use the "Like", "Tweet", and "+1" on other website, tracking cookies are placed on us by the social network so that the user's interests and online shopping behavior can be easily tracked by marketers. Not only that, social websites such as Facebook also allow companies to place within ads cookies and beacons, wich are pieces of software that can track the users and gather information about what they were doing on a page, in the users computer. Just these two actions invase the users' privacy. Facebook also sell our information to marketers so that they can use a behavioral targeting marketing method to place ads on our Facebook pages. So I stand that using social media such as Facebook for marketing is an invasion of privacy
Doulos1202

Pro

I am not sure if Con understands that everything you publish on a "public website" is up for grabs. You and you alone control the output of information from your private life. Simply because a marketing company can tally up "Likes" and "tweets" does not necessarily mean that your privacy has been invaded. Why did you "like" it in the first place? I am assuming because you want others to know that you liked it "publicly". You also have the option of....

Disabling or deleting cookies to prevent from being tracked.
Taking advantage of the option to ensure all privacy boxes are selected.
Turn on in private filtering to prevent your information from leaking.
Refrain from putting personal information on public access.

Every website tracks consumer movement for marketing purposes. None of your vital private information is spilling into their hands that will affect you in anyway. Even phone company's exchange this same information for marketing tactics. [1]

Facebook customers are not you, me or other individuals, but companies. Individuals and their data product are not the customers. Technically facebook is not allowed to provide information about you however is allowed to provide trends that can relate to you. In that way, Facebook cannot sell information such as your name, sex, age, IP, etc. However, they can sell generalized information such as: "X% of female users, aged 18-20, from Tacoma, follow this trend, respond to certain posts, and frequently use the word 'Beiber". What they do is they show targeted ads according to geographic location like if a company wants their ads to be seen by only American users then facebook arrange this without giving any info of their users. There is one case in which facebook will share personal information to any particular user, if Security Agencies like FBI, CIA asks for it.

[1]Theregister.co.uk
Debate Round No. 2
12tafran

Con

My opponent stated that Facebook customers aren't any users but the companies. I think he might of misunderstood, I never said that we the users are the customers, but instead I said that the our information that we post on Facebook is their merchandises. According to the article "How Will Facebook Make Money?", it said that Facebook gives onsite advertisers and app developers the advantage of its user data to help them target ads and customize their content in apps. That means Facebook can and is providing what the users are doing and saying on Facebook to ads so they can target potential customers.

My opponent also said that "Likes" doesn't necessarily mean that our privacy is being invaded because we had liked it "publicly". Many marketers is using those "Likes" to track where the users had being on the web and Nik Cubrilovic, an Australian Blogger, found the evidences that Facebook "like" buttons track the users browsing even when they aren't logged. So Facebook can track users whenever the users encounter a "Likes" at a different site. Tracking cookies can also be place on cell phones and they can track the users movements on other carriers as well.

My opponents also mention that Facebook cannot sell information such as the users' name, sex, age, IP, etc. But Facebook have access to all the information that you put on it and they can sell it at their will sell those informations to marketers even though they claimed that they are not. How do you think ads are send to your e-mail address when you have never given to those sites. Facebook is providing them with all your information.

Not only that, many lawsuits have been filed to sue Facebook of invading the users privacy. In one case, a class- action lawsuit alleges that Facebook had violated the federal wiretap statues by tracking people's Internet browser history even when they are not logged in.

In conclusion, Facebook is using our information and activities as merchandise to marketers. Through Facebook games, they can leak you information to marketers whether if you permit them to. I believe that using social media such as Facebook for marketing is an invasion of privacy. This last statement from "How Will Facebook Make Money?" from PCWorld should convince everyone, Harvard Business School professor Ben Edelman said "After app developers and partner Websites get 'hooked,' Facebook could start charging for access to its user data"
Doulos1202

Pro

This being my final argument I'd like to thank Con for submitting this controversial debate. I'd like to explain my statement in hope that Con and voters would not assume that I am misunderstood. When I refer to customers I am referring to the marketing companies who wish to keep track of what people are interested in. It's an effective means of figuring out what people are interested by specific race, age, gender, location, favorite music, ads and games...you get the picture. They don't sell "personally identifiable information" which is data associated with your name and address and phone number. They gather information like what you like, what city you are in, and bundle that with similar information from other Facebook members and sell that bundle. No names, no addressed, no phone numbers. The information marketing companies receive is the same information your "friends" see. You have the option of customizing your profile to prevent others from viewing information you may find private to yourself. It is also listed in facebooks legal terms.

"You own all of the content and information you post on Facebook, and you can control how it is shared through your privacy and application settings."

Facebook.com/legal terms

Seeing how we do not pay for Facebook, we are not customers. I guess you could call us the product. Marketers want to know what we are interested that way they can use this and collect general information to produce a product we are looking for. What it narrows down to is if you are concerned with the information you are placing on a "publicly" accessible site than don't put it up. Aside from that you are safe when you customize your security settings not only on facebook but inprivate filtering as an option on your internet provider.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 5 years ago
RoyLatham
12tafranDoulos1202Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con instigated the debate and hence has the obligation to make the resolution clear. The common meaning would be to "use facebook as the site is intended to be used." Con's argument about secret scams do not meet the resolution. One can e customer with exchanging money so long as there is an exchange of considerations, use in exchange for exposure to ads. It's a voluntary agreement. Arguments to Pro.
Vote Placed by TUF 5 years ago
TUF
12tafranDoulos1202Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro carries BOP that FB has privacy settings. Information taken on of social networking sites, is the fault of the user for not going through the proper privacy procedures.