Privacy groups ask FTC to block Facebook-Whatsapp deal

[Himanshu Arora]

Last month, Facebook acquired the world’s most popular instant messaging service. And it seems not everyone is delighted with the move. Fearing that the social networking giant might use Whatsapp's user data for advertising purposes, two consumer privacy groups on Thursday filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) stating that the deal may be an unfair trade practice, and should be blocked until there's a better understanding of how the company intends to use the personal data of millions of WhatsApp users.

Complaining parties, the Electronic Privacy and Information Center (EPIC) and the Center for Digital Democracy (CDD), claimed that Facebook has often changed its policies on collecting and sharing user data. For example, back in 2012, when Facebook acquired Instagram, it  amended the photo-sharing app's privacy policy.

Meanwhile, Facebook denies any such possibility. "As we have said repeatedly, Whatsapp will operate as a separate company and will honor its commitments to privacy and security," the company said in a statement in response to the filing. But the complainants are demanding more than just assurances. They want regulators to make sure that Facebook "insulates" WhatsApp user information from its data collection practices.

Facebook, which is the world's No.1 social networking website, generates the majority of its revenue through targeted advertisements. The company has a bad record of compromising users’ privacy, and has faced privacy complaints in the past. Back in 2011, the company was accused of using the names, photographs, and identities of users to advertise products without their permission.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/55921-privacy-groups-ask-ftc-to-block-facebook-whatsapp-deal.html

 

[Kibaruk]

I have three words to say to EPIC and CDD: Switch to Line.

Or whichever of the lot of different messaging apps there are, encrypted, non encrypted, whatever they like.

 

[Guest]

Meanwhile, Facebook denies any such possibility. "As we have said repeatedly, Whatsapp will operate as a separate company and will honor its commitments to privacy and security," the company said in a statement in response to the filing.

Seriously I don't beliieve Facebook at all. I believe that they are lying about it. It's too impossible to buy Whatsapp for no reason and opreation seperate. It doesn't make any sense for them to waste billons to do nothing. Facebook think that we are stupid.

 

[MrAnderson]

Really people, do you think you are going to just get free services without out some kind of give back?

My privacy concerns with Facebook are not based on serving of adds... We should be more concerned over how they store your information, you control over removing it for good, and their lack of transparency regarding how long the retain information, what is being captured, and who it gets shared with, especially when it is not anonymized. I would be supportive of scanning the contents of my conversations - that kind of goes too far. Instant messages, and texts have an expected level of privacy associated with their use, although some implementations could be open to external monitoring. Nevertheless, implicit storing, duplication our side of the context of user case, and scanning private conversations is where I draw a line. With all that said... I don't think this transaction will be blocked on those grounds only. I people don't like something seriously quit complaining and use something else... the fall of a titian leaves ample room for alternative. It's not like you don't have options people. Maybe not better at the moment, but what is more important to you will speak volumes with you actions... not just your yapping.

 

[wastedkill]

Privacy groups want to block it because they are jelly at not investing in whatsapp for a share of that $19billion.

 

[MilwaukeeMike]

I don't understand how people can expect to receive something as useful as Facebook for free. What do these privacy groups expect, just for FB to show untargeted ads? Untargeted ads are nearly worthless and aren't used anywhere ever. Having your ads be useful to you is such a small price to pay for FB it's hardly measurable. I don't even know why people would be against it, I'd rather see ads about new smartphones than women's shoes.

 

[wastedkill]

I don't understand how people can expect to receive something as useful as Facebook for free. What do these privacy groups expect, just for FB to show untargeted ads? Untargeted ads are nearly worthless and aren't used anywhere ever. Having your ads be useful to you is such a small price to pay for FB it's hardly measurable. I don't even know why people would be against it, I'd rather see ads about new smartphones than women's shoes.

Imagine if google licensed their tech to facebook... DAMN ads that matter which will also increase profit for FB as advertisers will need to pay more and ads will get clicked more, plus google will earn a bit of extra profit as well

 

[MrAnderson]

Google and Facebook are competing for social network ad revenue. No matter what, the current business model for free and even paid services include ads. The advertising dollars help fund just about everything. It funds TV and Movies with commercials and product placement... it is the cycle of life.

Moreover, these activist groups get publicity when they chime in with big stories that are relevant to their cause. Wasn't PETA somewhere near by when the Call of Duty franchise started to use dogs in the latest Ghost title? This is how these groups let us know they exist; IMHO I think it is simple as that.