The real question is, did they decide not to because they realized it was unethical? Or because they felt it was too risky to public perception?
Most likely they realized it wasn't as profitable when compared to other options.
Facebook Considered Charging for Access to User Data
11–20 of 45 posts
Re: Facebook Considered Charging for Access to User Data
#12The real question is, did they decide not to because they realized it was unethical? Or because they felt it was too risky to public perception?
[deleted]
Re: Facebook Considered Charging for Access to User Data
#13Isn't their ad product already effectively charging for access to the user data? In a slightly more obfuscated way, sure, but broadly the same?
I don't think so. I think the more correct way to frame it would be that they are charging for access to the space in a user's feed. Like renting billboard space, except the user data makes it very easy to understand where you should put that billboard.
Re: Facebook Considered Charging for Access to User Data
#14They already did this experiment years ago. They had a product called Pylon with Datasift. Rumor had it people thought it was a cool idea, in theory, but few people had any practical uses for it.
Re: Facebook Considered Charging for Access to User Data
#15Isn't their ad product already effectively charging for access to the user data? In a slightly more obfuscated way, sure, but broadly the same?
I don't think so. I think the more correct way to frame it would be that they are charging for access to the space in a user's feed. Like renting billboard space, except the user data makes it very easy to understand where you should put that billboard.
[deleted]
Re: Facebook Considered Charging for Access to User Data
#16Isn't their ad product already effectively charging for access to the user data? In a slightly more obfuscated way, sure, but broadly the same?
Yes, but that's just enough obfuscation for them to deny any claim they do charge. But from the free content I was able to see on this WSJ article (not a subscriber) they considered charging businesses in addition to users. Perhaps in the same way they charge for access to user data in France. Where some Facebook users can only see, for example, the first friend photo. The rest of the friend photos then appear behind a paywall. I saw this just last week actually in Indonesia from a tourist trying to show me some photos of his girlfriend back home—only he couldn't because the mobile app his the images of his friends behind a content upgrade.
Re: Facebook Considered Charging for Access to User Data
#17Even if customers pay for a service, isn't it likely that eventually the service will also want to sell their data anyway in order to increase margins?
Re: Facebook Considered Charging for Access to User Data
#18The real question is, did they decide not to because they realized it was unethical? Or because they felt it was too risky to public perception?
I don't get this obsession with ethics (in terms of correct motives) from companies. Why does the thought process behind the behavior matter when it comes to a public company, over and above the behavior itself? The fact that the company is responsive to public opinion should the goal.
Re: Facebook Considered Charging for Access to User Data
#19The real question is, did they decide not to because they realized it was unethical? Or because they felt it was too risky to public perception?
I don't get this obsession with ethics (in terms of correct motives) from companies. Why does the thought process behind the behavior matter when it comes to a public company, over and above the behavior itself? The fact that the company is responsive to public opinion should the goal.
Act too unethically and with popular opinion against you you’ll quickly find legislation against your interests.