
Of all the reactions so far to Facebookâs Home announcement yesterday, the one that most caught my eye was Om Malikâs cautionary missive entitled âWhy Facebook Home bothers me: It destroys any notion of privacyâ.
In it, Om warns that Facebook Home has the worrying potential to track our every move because being âalways onâ can mean âalways collecting dataâ:
âIt can start to correlate all of your relationships, all of the places you shop, all of the restaurants you dine in and other such data. The data from accelerometer inside your phone could tell it if you are walking, running or driving.â
The risk here, he warns, is that âFacebook is going to use all this data â not to improve our lives â but to target better marketing and advertising messages at us.â
Is that really such a bad thing?
Itâs worth noting that while Mark Zuckerberg said yesterday that Facebook Home would be used for advertising in the future, we donât know for sure that it will be doing the kind of tracking Om describes, (Facebook says it wonât actively track location, for example), but itâs a topic worth addressing. Even if Facebook Home doesnât track as much as Om suggests, maybe it should.
Do you really want bad ads?
Advertising is an inconvenient reality in this world. We donât really want it, but itâs an important factor in how the economy works and how most online services (including The Next Web and GigaOM) keep going. Most advertising is horribly targeted. Even âtracking cookieâ based advertising that uses the sites you visit to target which ads you see is flawed (ever visited a particular e-commerce site and then seen ads for it all over the Web for days afterwards, even though youâve already shopped there?).
Facebookâs advertising system is praised for its impressively granular targeting system, but being able to target 28-to-34-year-old married women who like The Walking Dead is far more useful to the advertiser than the end user. It often results in terribly targeted ads when Facebook could do so much better by using more information.
I want more targeted ads. If Iâm going to have to see advertising, I want it to know what I want before I do and cater to my needs. I want it to have analysed my behaviour and know that Iâm probably thinking about buying a new mobile phone now, or that because I travel abroad a lot I want a good deal on travel insurance, or that because I walked an average of 7,113 steps per day last week (true story â thanks Fitbit!) I probably should go to the gym more.
Sure, there are concerns to address. As Om points out, Facebook is âa company that is known to have played loose-and-easy with consumer privacy and data since its very inception.â A âdo not trackâ option would be an important addition to such detailed analysis of our habits â it needs to be optional. Also, just like the data produced by wearable devices, thereâs a risk it could be subpoenaed in court cases to find out if you were really doing what you said you were, or accessed by hackers wanting to find out what you get up to.
The uncanny valley of targeted advertising
I believe that just as with acceptance of human-like robots, thereâs an âuncanny valleyâ of targeted advertising. Many people resist it now because itâs just not targeted enough and shows its flaws when a regular shopper at Target is shown lots of Target ads, or when people who hate gambling are shown ads for poker apps because they otherwise fit the profile of the kind of person who likes gambling.
Targeted advertising will gain true acceptance when itâs so targeted that we donât notice it any more. If Facebook Home and other apps with the potential to track our every activity and move can get us there, Iâm all for it.
Also read: Facebook Home doesnât impress, but its potential as a data collection powerhouse does
Keep up with the latest Facebook news at TNW Facebook.
Image credit: Getty Images
Get the TNW newsletter
Get the most important tech news in your inbox each week.