The line between privacy and transparency has been provoked the moment social media rose in the early 2000s. The innocent intentions of social networking that people thought were getting became total anarchy. People’s data were compromised and became a product between sellers and buyers (O’Marah, 2018). The so-called “Facebook” is a controlled isolated bubble formed to fool people into believing it is a form of social networking. However, Facebook gained unbelievable popularity when it was launched back in 2004. And due to the unprecedented success of Facebook, people instantly trusted the giant social media network with their private data, which led to unforeseen consequences later one (Hern, 2018).
Facebook, like many other social media platforms, has become what is now called “Surveillance Capitalist” monitoring and deriving revenues from its users, the more data the user provides, the more money they generate (Glance, 2018). Should Facebook be regulated? Facebook should be regulated because they have no respect for the user’s privacy and the data they collect from the user.
Glance (2018) writes about how Facebook became a “Surveillance Capitalist”, and how they tolerate transparency of privacy. He further explains how the platform uses “Privacy Paradox” to keep users sharing more information. Which, as a result, led to at least 50 million user accounts to be compromised (Glance, 2018). Moreover, Facebook targeted users’ data and claimed it as a something to be sold in the market (Glance, 2018). Glance (2018) also writes in his article about how Facebook used those data and sold it to advertisement companies to create what is called “Social Media Targeting” to make profits. Part of Facebook innovation has always been to give the people the power of sharing and connecting with other people across the world (Elgot, 2015).
127 our experts are availableright now
Elgot (2015) writes about how the world has changed and become an open community where people can meet and get to share their experiences. Regulating Facebook on the other hand, will hurt their performance and will not allow them to grow and innovate but it will force them to redirect their focus elsewhere (Elgot, 2015). Both of the articles above share similarities, and have some differences. They both aim to protect the user’s interest and prevent giant social networks such as Facebook from using their private data from getting in the wrong hands.
Moreover, they differ in their methodology, in the first article, Glance (2018) thought that regulating Facebook is the only way to prevent them from using the user’s private data. Meanwhile, Elgot (2015) thought that regulating Facebook can have severe consequences on company innovation. However, both of them never mentioned who would regulate it, the government or private organizations. In conclusion, Facebook as a social media network is a very vicious circle riddled with both risks and opportunities, so all users must take the necessary precautions to ensure the safety of their data and considering that their track record is still questionable, it can only be accomplished by regulating it.
References
- Hern, A. (2018, May, 16). Facebook lets advertisers target users based on sensitive interests. The Guardian Post. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/
- O’Marah, K. (2018, May, 29). Facebook Should Beg To Be Regulated. Forbes Post. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/
- Elgot, J. (2015, Aug, 28). From relationships to revolutions: seven ways Facebook has changed the world. The Guardian Post. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/
- Glance, D. (2018, Apr, 16). How Facebook uses the ‘privacy paradox’ to keep users sharing. The Conversation. Retrieved from http://theconversation.com/
