Blackspot

MySpacing Facebook

What will it take for Facebook to lose its cool?

For the third time, a groundswell of outrage is rising against Facebook's commercialization of friendship. The anti-Facebook movement began in 2007 with their introduction of "Beacon," a feature that gave external commercial websites private information about logged in users for the purposes of targeted advertising. Shocked users launched online petitions, posted angry status updates and filed a class action lawsuit. Officially, Facebook capitulated and Beacon was abandoned nine months ago. But then, only three months after their apparent concession, Facebook committed what has come to be known as "Facebook’s Greatest Betrayal": they retroactively changed their privacy policy, publicly revealing the formally private information of its 400 million members. Again, users got angry and protested but CEO Zuckerberg didn't budge and opposition effectively died. Now, believing that its users have been forced into submission, Facebook has gone for the kill -- reinventing Beacon in its most sinister form.

Deceptively known as "social plug-ins," Facebook's new system for giving commercial websites access to your personal information is to scatter "I like" buttons around the web. These buttons are ostensibly to allow users to identify what they like on the Internet. But the real benefit for the fat-cats at Facebook is the lucrative deals with corporate websites they stand to make because these buttons will give Facebook the ability to grant certain, undisclosed sites access to your Facebook information without your prior consent. If the "like button" is on a site, and you are a Facebook user, then your information will be transmitted automatically to these chosen sites. Your profile, the names of your friends, your favorite books and more will be used to sell you junk. All that data you entered into Facebook has become a goldmine for hungry advertisers looking to "personalize" their ads and Zuckerberg stands to make a mint.

Facebook has irrevocably tarnished its reputation in its bald pursuit of money. It has cashed in on its former reputation as a cool, hip online hangout and is now just another MySpace — a corporate-owned digital swamp of advertising. And while you may expect another round of anger, this time the reaction is eerily different. Past protests were done under the assumption that Facebook was our community and that it could be changed by our demands. But now that myth is shattered and the realization is dawning that the best tactic is not calls for reform but uncooling.

With more and more people coming to the quietly indignant realization that Facebook is lame like Myspace, the site is facing inevitable decline. And as a growing percentage of the site starts to log out, we will see the emergence of a new social networking platform built on non-commercial principles for the benefit of friendship and not consumerism.

Micah White is a Contributing Editor at Adbusters and an independent activist. www.micahmwhite.com or micah (at) adbusters.org

Adbusters 111 Cover

On Newsstands December 3

At last we’re in Winter. It’s the year 2047. A worn scrapbook from the future arrives in your lap. It offers a stunning global vision, a warning to the next generations, a repository of practical wisdom, and an invaluable roadmap which you need to navigate the dark times, and the opportunities, which lie ahead.

Subscribe to Adbusters Magazine

156 comments on the article “MySpacing Facebook”

Displaying 71 - 80 of 156

Page 8 of 16

Anonymous

I'd also like to recomend another article, but by reason online's Jesse Walker.

http://reason.com/archives/2010/05/19/watch-out-facebook

He's more right than micah is on this issue, because I think he identifies the real problem that is stopping facebook from becoming like myspace. Basically people are just to lazy to switch to a new social networking site.

There's also another school of thought that says decline is inevtiable because facebook is just to damn complicated.

http://www.baekdal.com/opinion/facebook-is-dying-social-is-not/

Anonymous

I'd also like to recomend another article, but by reason online's Jesse Walker.

http://reason.com/archives/2010/05/19/watch-out-facebook

He's more right than micah is on this issue, because I think he identifies the real problem that is stopping facebook from becoming like myspace. Basically people are just to lazy to switch to a new social networking site.

There's also another school of thought that says decline is inevtiable because facebook is just to damn complicated.

http://www.baekdal.com/opinion/facebook-is-dying-social-is-not/

Anonymous

What about an ethical organisation creating its own social networking site...

What about adbusters (now 85,618 strong) creating its own site...

Anonymous

What about an ethical organisation creating its own social networking site...

What about adbusters (now 85,618 strong) creating its own site...

Sue Whoot

I did not know where to post this, but I felt the need.

Hello and good day,

I like adbusters, yet i am disappointed by their boojy ways, what is with all this cheeky high brow artists shite? are the editors and art directors of this magazine in bed with gagosian, dietch, and the likes? all these super expensive artists are being name dropped and the absurd amount of money there art goes for has an absurd impact on the environment. plus who knows of these artist but the intellectuals, this magazine needs to be more geared towards making a change. i am not saying that a bunch of high fashion college art hipsters and other boojy "culture jammers" can't make a change, i just think is the magazine was more concentrated on reaching a wider audience, and taking it down a knotch on the booj meter, the greater mass could be reached and the @%$*!! $9 dollar magazine could be used to actually make a change, instead of promoting the newest furnas, or meretu painting and looking cool shuffled in with all the other "cool" magazines a "culture jammer" probably buys, hmmmmm, Food and Wine, Architecture digest and Condi Nasty's Traveller.

Not bitter, just laughing at the irony!!

SUE WHOOT

Sue Whoot

I did not know where to post this, but I felt the need.

Hello and good day,

I like adbusters, yet i am disappointed by their boojy ways, what is with all this cheeky high brow artists shite? are the editors and art directors of this magazine in bed with gagosian, dietch, and the likes? all these super expensive artists are being name dropped and the absurd amount of money there art goes for has an absurd impact on the environment. plus who knows of these artist but the intellectuals, this magazine needs to be more geared towards making a change. i am not saying that a bunch of high fashion college art hipsters and other boojy "culture jammers" can't make a change, i just think is the magazine was more concentrated on reaching a wider audience, and taking it down a knotch on the booj meter, the greater mass could be reached and the @%$*!! $9 dollar magazine could be used to actually make a change, instead of promoting the newest furnas, or meretu painting and looking cool shuffled in with all the other "cool" magazines a "culture jammer" probably buys, hmmmmm, Food and Wine, Architecture digest and Condi Nasty's Traveller.

Not bitter, just laughing at the irony!!

SUE WHOOT

Morgan

Speaking of commercialization of social networking sites, there's a group that created a blog about a new social networking site determined to stay clear of capitalist forces.

Check it out, it's pretty interesting, although I don't agree with some sections on their privacy policy.

Morgan

Speaking of commercialization of social networking sites, there's a group that created a blog about a new social networking site determined to stay clear of capitalist forces.

Check it out, it's pretty interesting, although I don't agree with some sections on their privacy policy.

Pages

Add a new comment

Comments are closed.