It’s widely known but not fully understood why the company Meta (formerly known as Facebook) collects and stores information for its 3.5 billion users across its platforms that include Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. The purpose of this mass data collection is for targeted advertising. Targeted ads are ads shown in social media feeds that are targeted toward each user based on their personal information Meta collects. Meta collects not just your personal information about you, but also they collect data on what you do across different apps and websites. This data accumulated is information about what you’re interested in, who you know, what you live by, what you tend to buy frequently, and much more. Companies will then pay Meta to advertise their products via targeted advertising (Higgins). This strategic use of users’ personal information to show them targeted ads is what makes up Meta’s plan to make profit, and the growth of this business model relies on increasing engagement time, because the longer you use Facebook and Instagram, the more frequently you see ads (Chatterley). With the widespread use of mass data collection used by Meta and other social network companies becoming so rampant, the push for digital privacy has ensued. The ones pushing for digital privacy want Meta to change their business model so Meta doesn’t have to rely on gathering massive amounts of data to make profit. However, Meta refuses to change its business model, causing companies and people to put more pressure on Meta over the recent years. One company in particular, Apple, has already taken action against Meta’s business model.
Why more changes to Meta’s business model are needed
For the past six years, Meta has been the company people love to hate, as shown by all the negative reviews on its apps, to articles critiquing the company's policies. In particular, the app Facebook has been at the center of all the negative views. Apple’s IOS 14.5 software update was a beneficial and effective limit to Meta’s business model as described earlier, however this change should not be the only change, but it should serve as a stepping stone to more changes. Meta’s business model, the fuel to Facebook’s fire, needs to go through more changes because users of Facebook are not given enough rights and security over their privacy, Meta can’t manage its growth, and Meta allows content that increases polarization and mental health to stay on its platforms.
Reason #1: Meta lacks when it comes to providing its user’s with rights and security over their personal information
Meta’s business model needs changes because the company does not give its users rights over their personal information. In early 2021, Meta created a policy that requires that everyone that uses WhatsApp must share their personal info with Facebook. This personal information being shared includes “battery level, signal strength, app version, browser information, mobile network, connection information (including phone number, mobile operator or ISP), language and time zone, IP address, device operations information, and identifiers…” (Page). Another issue that Meta has is it asks for too much personal information and fails to secure this information. For example Facebook Messenger, another messaging app owned by Meta, procures the user’s physical address, email, address, name, phone number, user ID, device ID, purchase history, financial information, precise / coarse location, contacts, photos or videos, search history, and more without letting the user know (Coldfusion). Meta does not respect its users' privacy, and Meta’s lack of attention to privacy goes against what author Bruce Schneier concluded in his book Data and Golaith, stating “Privacy is an inherent human right, and a requirement for maintaining the human condition with dignity and respect. It is about choice, and having the power to control how you present yourself to the world” (Schneier 23). Some may argue that as long Meta keeps its users’ data private, it shouldn’t be a concern that Meta asks for a lot of personal information. However, Meta has proven to be unable to keep its users’ data private. In early October 2021, 1.5 billion users had their personal data leaked and sold on a hacker forum. This personal data sold includes names, phone numbers, location, and user ID, which can be “utilized for phishing and account takeover attacks.”, states Miklos Zoltan, the founder and CEO of Privacy Affairs (Zoltan).
How Meta can be more private and secure withs its users’ personal information
A change that needs to be made is that Meta should only be allowed to collect personal information that is necessary. For example, Facebook Messenger does not need to collect its users location and financial information but only the users’ phone number to make a messaging app operate. Apps like Signal and Telegram are examples of popular apps that only ask for the user’s phone number (Coldfusion). Meta’s reluctance to give its users rights over their personal data combined with Meta’s failure to keep its users’ data private is amplified as Meta’s apps continue to spread to millions across the world. Throughout this international scaling of its apps, Meta has displayed its inability to control its growth.
Reason #2: Meta is unable to manage its growth
Another aspect of Meta’s business model that is an issue is that Meta’s business model is capable of worldwide growth, meaning that Meta’s platform has the ability to spread across the world, not limited by borders, regions, languages, or cultures. In principle, spreading such an app like Facebook that allows people to connect with each other, across the world seems like a good idea. However, in practice, Meta has not shown to keep up and manage its growth across the world. Roger McNamee, an early Facebook investor and former adviser to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, agrees that Meta was not prepared to spread Facebook across the world, stating, “The problem is the underlying business model of Facebook, where you bring three billion people onto one network with no boundaries and no safety net.”(Chatterley). A horrific event that displays Meta’s inability to manage its growth across the world happened during 2016 and 2017 when Myanmar military officials used Facebook to launch a campaign, fueled by hate, against the Muslim Rohingya, a minority group in Myanmar. This campaign resulted in rape, murder, and imposed migration on the Rohingya people, resulting into what is now known as the Myanmar genocide (Stevenson). Facebook’s role in the genoicide was clear enough that Meta admitted their failure to take action. Meta “failed to prevent its platform from being used to foment division and incite offline violence in the country.”, states Meta Product Policy Manager Alex Warofka (Stevenson).
How Meta can manage its growth
A report, by the Business for Social Responsibility (BSR), on the inaction Meta took explains how Meta can prevent future incitements of violence from happening. The BSR “recommends that Facebook increase enforcement of policies for content posted on its platform; exercise greater transparency with data that shows its progress; and engage with civil society and officials in Myanmar” (Stevenson). I believe that Facebook can be used as a tool to connect people across the world, but only if Meta can manage its growth by funding and providing more employees to enact the changes recommended by the BSR. Taking more action to police its platforms may help prevent violence from being incited, however emotionally intense content that increases polarization and mental health issues would still persist.
Reason #3: Meta mainstreams content that increases teen mental health issues
As stated in the introduction, Meta’s growth in profit relies on people engaging with their apps for longer periods of time because apps like Facebook are more appealing to advertisers when the customers use their app for longer, making them see more ads. The problem is Meta will allow emotionally intense content that increases polarization and health issues to stay on its platform just because this content increases user engagement time. In an article by Dan Milmo and Kari Paul titled, “Facebook harms children and is damaging democracy, claims whistleblower”, Milmo and Paul detail a congressional testimony where a Meta whistleblower named Francis Haugan exposes Meta by discussing internal documents she publicsized. These internal documents are studies conducted by Meta that “revealed the company knew Instagram was damaging teenagers’ mental health and that changes to Facebook’s News Feed feature… had made the platform more polarizing and divisive.” (Milmo). In her testimony, Haughans explains that the internal documents proved that Facebook algorithms can lead a user to harmful content and that teenagers are especially bad at self-regulation and fall for harmful content. For example, Haughan states that an algorithm “led children from very innocuous topics like healthy recipes … all the way to anorexia-promoting content over a very short period of time” (Milmo). Other Meta led research that also proves that platforms like Instagram use harmful tactics to engage vulnerable teenagers found that “one in three teen girls felt that Instagram made them more depressed about their own bodies” (Coldfusion). Also the research “revealed that 13% of the teen girls asked said that [Instagram] made suicidal thoughts worse.” (Coldfusion).
How to stop Meta from harming teen’s mental health
Due to social media being ‘tobacco for kids’, Huaghan believes that Meta should be treated like the tobacco industry. I agree. These internal documents prove that Meta has been hiding the studies that prove that Facebook and Instagram can be harmful just like how the tobacco industry hid the facts about what smoking does to your lungs. Furthermore, if the government acts on Meta like it did on the tobacco industry, the young population who lack self-regulation will finally get the protection they need.
Reason #3.1: Meta mainstreams content that increases polarization
The internal documents also have shown that by making the News Feed algorithm on Facebook promote the most engaging topics, the content that is typically at the top of the news feed is polarizing content, which is in forms of fake news, political clashing, conspiracy theories, and extremist groups. Moreover, if the content that is most viewed is polarizing, it makes it impossible for people to agree on issues, and if people can’t agree, nothing can be solved and democracy can’t work (Milmo).
How Meta can make its platforms less polarizing
In order to make platforms like Facebook less polarizing, Haughan suggests that Meta become more transparent on what their algorithms are doing as well as make Facebook’s news feed make stories appear chronologically (Milmo). I believe that with Haughans suggested changes, the public can better understand why certain content is going viral and that this transparency will pave the way for the public to decide what content should stay or leave the platform. I believe that giving the general public this kind of control can ensure that the content shown is for the public good.
Current measures against Meta’s business model
During April 2021, Apple released IOS 14.5, which is a software update that can be installed on iPhones. This software update, explained by journalist Joanna Stern, brings out two key features: the privacy nutrition label and app tracking transparency. The first key feature, the privacy nutrition label, is a feature that requires all apps to show what data about the user they collect and how they plan to use such data. This information, Stern asserts, can easily be understood and acted on. The second key feature, app tracking transparency, gives the user the choice on whether they want the current app they are using to track what they see and do across other apps and websites (Stern). These changes are aimed at Meta’s business model since Meta relies on collecting its user's data, which CEO of Apple Tim Cook is strong against, stating that “if we accept as normal and unavoidable that everything in our lives can be aggregated and sold, then we lose so much more than data. We lose the freedom to be human.” (Velazco). IOS 14.5, more specifically app tracking transparency, is at the root of Apple’s stance on privacy, claims author Paul Reskinoff. Reskinoff back up his point by bringing up what former CEO and founder of Apple Steve Jobs defined as what privacy means, stating, “Privacy means that people know what they’re signing up for. In plain English, and repeatedly.” And privacy means that you “ let [the user] know precisely what you’re going to do with their data.” (Resnikoff). Apple’s execution of IOS 14.5 adheres to their former CEO’s vision on privacy since the app tracking transparency option is presented as a pop up before jumping into any app. Journalist Bensinger presents information that proves the IOS 14.5 software update to be a success. He states, “Just 6 percent of U.S. daily users of Apple’s latest mobile software are opting to allow companies like Facebook and its many affiliates to hoover up data about them and sell it to advertisers, according to Flurry Analytics.” (Bensiger). Apple’s IOS 14.5 software update has been a success and serves as a major blow to Meta’s business model. Despite the successful measure taken against Meta, many pushing for a change in Meta’s business model see that the social network company needs a lot more changes to be implemented.
To Summarize
For too long, the negative impacts of Meta’s business have been all too present in society. IOS 14.5 has provided a great start to fixing this business model but I believe more changes need to occur. Meta’s business model doesn’t give its users’ rights and security over their personal data. Additionally, this business model shoots for massive growth but disregards any practical plans for managing such growth. Lastly, this business model resorts to allowing content that mainstreams harmful and polarizing content in order to increase engagement time. I believe that taking action against Meta’s business model by implementing the changes detailed previously can lead to a future of technology that is more humane. Specifically, I believe that Meta’s social networks can be technology that respects its users privacy and security, is responsible for its growth around the world, and brings us as a society together instead of ripping us apart.
Works Cited
Bensinger, Greg. “Americans Actually Want Privacy. Shocking.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 20 May 2021, https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/20/opinion/apple-facebook-ios-privacy.html.
Chatterley, Julia. “Former Zuckerberg Adviser: Facebook's Problem Is Its Business Model.” CNN, Cable News Network, 26 Oct. 2021, https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/26/perspectives/facebook-roger-mcnamee-the-chat/index.html.
Coldfusion. Apple vs Facebook - the Great Privacy Fight - Youtube. Coldfusion, 1 May 2021, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-pAwZTFCKI?hd=1.
Coldfusion. Leaked Documents Expose Facebook - YouTube. Coldfusion, 8 Oct. 2021, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Dzb1Yl413Q.
Higgins, Tim. “Apple, Facebook Trade Barbs over Privacy-Focused Business Models.” The Wall Street Journal, Dow Jones & Company, 29 Jan. 2021, https://www.wsj.com/articles/apple-to-roll-out-privacy-measures-despite-facebook-objections-11611810002?mod=article_inline.
Milmo, and Paul. “Facebook Harms Children and Is Damaging Democracy, Claims Whistleblower.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 6 Oct. 2021, https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/oct/05/facebook-harms-children-damaging-democracy-claims-whistleblower.
Page, Carly. “WhatsApp Tells Users: Share Your Data with Facebook or We'll Delete Your Account.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 11 Jan. 2021, https://www.forbes.com/sites/carlypage/2021/01/08/whatsapp-tells-users-share-your-data-with-facebook-or-well-deactivate-your-account/?sh=33601cc32d46.
Resnikoff, Paul. “What Steve Jobs Said about Protecting Privacy in 2010.” Digital Music News, 9 Sept. 2018, https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2018/03/25/steve-jobs-user-privacy-2010/.
Schneier, Bruce. Data and Goliath. Wiley, 2016.
Stern, Joanna “IPhone Apps Asking to Track You? Answers to Your IOS 14.5 Privacy Questions.” The Wall Street Journal, Dow Jones & Company, 15 Apr. 2021, https://www.wsj.com/articles/iphone-apps-asking-to-track-you-answers-to-your-ios-14-5-privacy-questions-11617800400.
Stevenson, Alexandra. “Facebook Admits It Was Used to Incite Violence in Myanmar.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 6 Nov. 2018, https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/06/technology/myanmar-facebook.html.
Velazco, Chris. “Tim Cook Takes Aim at Facebook's Practices during Privacy Conference.” Engadget, 28 Jan. 2021, https://www.engadget.com/tim-cook-privacy-cpdp-2021-slams-facebook-184333398.htm
Zoltan. “Data of over 1.5 Billion Facebook Users Sold on Hacker Forum.” Privacy Affairs, 28 Jan. 2022, https://www.privacyaffairs.com/facebook-data-sold-on-hacker-forum/.
Comentários