Right to Privacy on Facebook: Breaches and Protections
This paper examines the right to privacy on Facebook, one of the world's largest social networking services. It traces a chronology of notable privacy breaches, including the controversial Beacon marketing initiative, concerns over data retention after account deactivation, the rollout of facial recognition without user notice, and allegations of post-logout tracking. The paper also addresses dissenting views that place partial responsibility on users for oversharing, while arguing that Facebook's complex and mutable privacy policies fail to adequately protect members. It concludes with recommendations for clearer privacy policies and an opt-in approach to new features, emphasizing that robust privacy protections are essential to prevent identity theft and related harms.
- Introduction: Scope of paper: Facebook privacy rights
- Privacy on Facebook: A Background: Facebook's founding and sensitive user data
- A Chronology of Privacy Breaches: Beacon, data retention, facial recognition, tracking
- Dissenting Views: User oversharing and inadequate privacy policies
- The Need to Protect Privacy and the Way Forward: Opt-in features and clearer privacy policies
- Conclusion: Privacy essential to prevent identity theft
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper moves logically from historical context to specific case examples, giving each privacy breach its own focused treatment before stepping back to evaluate counterarguments.
- It engages fairly with dissenting views — acknowledging that users bear some responsibility for oversharing — before systematically rebutting that position with evidence from the literature.
- The conclusion ties the argument to real-world consequences (identity theft, financial loss), grounding the ethical discussion in practical stakes.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates effective use of citation-supported argumentation throughout. Rather than making unsupported assertions, the author consistently anchors each claim to a named source — drawing on Tavani, Bus et al., Gutwirth, Levmore and Nussbaum, and news sources — while still maintaining an independent analytical voice that synthesizes those sources into a coherent position.
Structure breakdown
The paper follows a classic five-part argumentative structure: a brief introduction establishing scope, a background section providing context, a central evidence section organized as a timeline of breaches, a counterargument section with rebuttal, and a forward-looking recommendation section followed by a short conclusion. This structure suits an ethics-focused persuasive essay at the undergraduate level.
Introduction
Today, millions of people continue to join dozens of social networking services, including but not limited to Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter. However, these services have been accused of neglecting the privacy of their members, either for economic gain or otherwise. This paper is concerned with the right to privacy, the need for that right, and how social networking services are handling the privacy issue — with a focus specifically on Facebook.
Privacy on Facebook: A Background
Facebook, according to Tavani, "is a popular social networking service (SNS) founded by Mark Zuckerberg in 2004, when he was a student at Harvard University" (155). According to the author, this service allows members not only to make new friends but also to share information about themselves with those they regard as friends on the platform. In the past, Facebook has been accused of invading the privacy of its members.
It is important to note that the amount of information Facebook holds on any of its members is particularly immense. When signing up, a user is provided with the option of filling out approximately 20 pieces of personal data, including but not limited to birthday, name(s), education and employment history, sex, relationship status, and views on religion and politics. From a casual observer's point of view, this information may not seem especially revealing. However, filling out such information makes available to anyone who views an individual's profile a comprehensive snapshot of that person. From a critical perspective, therefore, the kind of information currently stored on Facebook's servers regarding its individual members can be considered rather sensitive. With that in mind, there is a clear need for Facebook to guarantee users efficient safeguards and conditions tailored to protect such information from manipulation.
A Chronology of Privacy Breaches
In some instances, the privacy of users is undermined by the fact that social networking services are driven by the need to make a profit, which in most cases ultimately sparks the demand for personal information sharing. In 2007, a marketing initiative called Beacon was launched by Facebook. In the opinion of Tavani, this initiative was designed to enhance information sharing between members regarding the activities they undertook — that is, the purchases they made (155). The initiative proved controversial when "it disclosed what purchases users made at certain Web sites" (Tavani 155). This was an abuse of users' privacy, particularly given that the social networking service had reneged on a prior commitment not to share personally identifiable information.
Facebook has also had to contend with user concerns over what happens to information stored on its servers once members choose to permanently deactivate their accounts. As Tavani points out, users were afraid that such information could later be sold to third parties (156). Although Facebook subsequently amended its provisions to allow users to request the permanent deletion of all account information upon deactivation, there remains a need for the service to explicitly reassure users that it does not retain any of that information on its servers.
In more recent times, the social networking service has been criticized heavily for its facial recognition feature. This feature facilitates the tagging of photos by suggesting names of those to be tagged, based on a comparison of recently uploaded photos with those of the uploader's contacts. The privacy debate was sparked by Facebook's decision to roll out the feature without giving users advance notice — a particularly significant concern given that some members may not be comfortable having their names suggested in this way. As an indicator of how seriously the issue was taken, James notes that the EU made its intent to probe the move public, citing privacy concerns (n.p.).
Facebook has also been accused of tracking users even after they log out of active sessions (Mello, n.p.). In response, some users filed a complaint against the social networking service seeking billions of U.S. dollars for what they alleged was a violation of their privacy. Facebook vehemently denied the allegations.
Conclusion
The relevance of privacy on Facebook cannot be overstated going forward. A breach of that privacy leaves users exposed to identity theft, which may occasion financial loss or other serious harms. Therefore, Facebook should be actively involved in protecting the privacy of its users, even in those instances where doing so does not appear to make immediate economic sense.
References
Bus et al., ed. Digital Enlightenment Yearbook 2012. Amsterdam: IOS Press, 2012. Print.
Gutwirth, Serge, Yves Poullet, and Paul De Hert, eds. Data Protection in a Profiled World. New York: Springer, 2010. Print.
James, Kyle. "Facebook Facial Recognition Raises Eyebrows in Germany, EU." Deutsche Welle. N.p., 9 June 2011. Web. 1 July 2012.
Levmore, Saul, and Martha C. Nussbaum, eds. The Offensive Internet: Speech, Privacy, and Reputation. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2011. Print.
Mello, John P. "Facebook Hit with Lawsuit Alleging Privacy Wrongs." PC World. N.p., 18 May 2012. Web. 1 July 2012.
Milian, Mark. "Facebook Lets Users Opt Out of Facial Recognition." CNN International. N.p., 7 June 2011. Web. 1 July 2012.
Tavani, Herman T. Ethics and Technology: Controversies, Questions, and Strategies for Ethical Computing. 3rd ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons, 2010. Print.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.