Facebook bites again

Sometimes you just have to wonder about the idiots running that joint.

And then you have to wonder, how long til Facebook and other communications behemoths decide there is just too much free speech in the land of the free? Would the Constitution even matter? Can the First Amendment survive the Internet?

From the Wall Street Journal:

“Maybe we will block content in some countries, but not others,” Adam Conner, a Facebook lobbyist, told the Journal. “We are occasionally held in uncomfortable positions because now we’re allowing too much, maybe, free speech in countries that haven’t experienced it before,” he said.

Another Facebook privacy problem

This one seems worse than others and potentially far more dangerous than, say, hooker ads on craigslist. Facebook may be disclosing your location data, whether or not you want that to happen.

From the Electronic Privacy Information Center:

The recently announced Facebook service Places makes user location data routinely available to others, including Facebook business partners, regardless of whether users wish to disclose their location. There is no single opt-out to avoid location tracking. The default settings of this new tool allow user data to be disclosed in a number of ways that are not immediately clear to users. Facebook has put a complicated set of new privacy settings in place to deal with the “Places” tool. Additionally, Facebook allows anyone to create a location on the system, which means anyone could add the location of a person’s home or business to the website without the person’s knowledge.

By default, Facebook has enabled Places for all users. If a user chooses to “check in” from a mobile device, that user’s location is published to that user’s news feed. If the option “Include me in ‘People Here Now’ after I check in” is selected, the user’s location also appears on the public page of the location, available to everyone. This setting is enabled by default for those who have previously set some of their other information available to everyone.

If a user checks in, that user can “tag” a number of friends as also being at the same location. The default behavior for users tagged by their friends is very confusing. Those users who have taken no action with respect to this setting will receive an email and a prompt with the options to “allow” or “not now.” Those who choose “allow” are automatically set to allow all future check-ins by friends. Those who choose “not now” are still tagged as being at the location, just not “checked in.” Users are also tagged immediately when the check-in takes place, although the tags may be removed once users become aware of them. A user who has ever used Places to check in is automatically set to allow check-ins by friends.

By default, check-in information is also available to the third-party developers of applications that a user has authorized, as well as to the third-party developers of applications that a user’s friends have authorized.

Additionally, At the Coca-Cola Village Amusement Park in Israel, visitors were recently issued bracelets with RFID chips that linked to their Facebook accounts. RFID readers scattered throughout the park updated the users’ Facebook pages when the bracelets were scanned and on-site photographers posted photos that were automatically tagged with the users’ identities.

For users who do not want location information revealed to others, EPIC recommends that Facebook users: (1) disable “Friends can check me in to Places,” (2) customize “Places I Check In,” (3) disable “People Here
Now,” and (4) uncheck “Places I check in to” from the list of settings accessible to applications through your friends.

EPIC, joined by many consumer and privacy organizations, has two complaints pending at the Federal Trade Commission concerning Facebook’s unfair and deceptive trade practices, which are frequently associated with new product announcements.

I followed EPIC’s recommendations. I don’t need to hide where I go, but it’s really not the business of marketers or the world.

Dr. Laura calls it quits — maybe others will follow!

Dr. Laura Schlesinger, who recently used the n-word 11 times in five minutes on her show, is calling it quits. May others who abuse the airwaves and listeners’ intelligence soon follow. From the Washington Post:

Laura Schlessinger, the blunt-spoken, sometimes controversial radio talk-show host whose racially charged comments drew widespread condemnation last week, said Tuesday that she will end her radio career at the end of the year.

The announcement by the host of the “Dr. Laura” program was a stunning denouement after a week in which Schlessinger was widely criticized for describing an African American caller to her program as “hypersensitive” for taking offense at a neighbor’s racial taunting. To illustrate her claim of a racial double standard, she said that black comedians often use the N-word on TV without criticism, but the word is forbidden for white people. She used the racial epithet, unexpurgated, 11 times in five minutes, despite her caller’s protests.

Tough times continue for JS, despite “penetration” bloviation

The Journal Sentinel, in an understandably un-bylined puff piece, boasted Sunday that it still has the highest readership ratio — aka “market penetration” — among the 50 largest newspaper markets.

Among the things not mentioned: the actual circulation figures of the papers in the top 50 markets (the JS is not in first place) or the change over the years in readership figures. Is the JS just bleeding to death slower than other papers are?

The paper’s second quarter financial reports, released in July, were not good. Revenue continues to slide – it was down $2 million, or $4.1%, as advertising continued its decline. Classified ad revenue was down 9.5% “largely due to decreases in the real estate, automotive and other advertising categories,” Journal Communications reported. Retail advertsing was down 5.6%.

Online advertising was up $300,000, but the real boost in the bottom line came from cutting costs, not by any big jump in advertising bucks:

Daily newspaper operating expenses decreased 8.3%, primarily due to the reduction in employee related costs, other cost reduction initiatives and reduced expenses related to revenue declines partially offset by a $0.2 million increase in newsprint and paper expense.