Facebook Will Give Users More Control Over Who Sees What

Facebook settings Under the new privacy controls, users will be able to share as much, or as little, as they choose.

Update | 7:18 p.m. Included more information and comments about the privacy changes.

Facebook’s biggest strength is also its Achilles’ heel: Just about everyone you know is on the social networking site, and more likely than not, those people are your Facebook “friends.”

That can be a good thing — you can easily share all of your messages, photos and videos with everyone in your network. But it can also be a headache to assign people to different groups and slog through the Web site’s 40-some privacy control settings to parse who gets to see what.

And if you want to post a status update reminding guests about a surprise party for your best friend — but prevent the birthday girl from seeing it — good luck figuring out how to do that.

All of that is about to change, Facebook said Wednesday. The company will be overhauling its privacy controls to make it easier for users can share as much — or as little — as they want with whomever they choose.

Although Facebook provided few details, users would even be able to share updates and other personal data with the general public, much like Twitter.

“Facebook’s mission is to give people to power to share and make the world more open and connected,” said Chris Kelly, chief privacy officer for the company, in a conference call with reporters Wednesday. “We want people to be able to share with as narrow or as broad of an audience as they choose.”

The new features use the same privacy settings already in place on Facebook, but rather than apply them universally across the profile of a user, they can be applied to each bit of uploaded content.

“What we want to do is encourage people to make a decision about each piece of content they publish,” said Leah Pearlman, product manager at Facebook, in a phone interview.

To usher in the new settings, the company said it plans to release “transition tools” that will help members tinker with their privacy settings on a single, organized page.

The new controls will come as something of a relief to many Facebook users struggling to straddle the line between sharing personal and private content on the Web, said Charlene Li, founder of digital strategy firm Altimeter Group.

“I have a wide mix of friends on Facebook and have never felt comfortable sharing everything I do with all of them,” she said in an e-mail exchange. “So I’m looking forward to having a ‘girlfriend’ feed where I can dish with my close girlfriends, but also use Facebook to broadcast to everyone, even outside of Facebook.”

Ms. Li also pointed out that the changes could give Facebook a better edge over Twitter as a real-time messaging system because users would have more than two options for publishing updates.

“This does present a very interesting alternative to Twitter,” she said. “In many ways, it trumps what Twitter does because there are two levels at which someone can use Facebook — a ‘public’ one versus multiple layers of ‘private’ feeds.”

As our sister blog, Gadgetwise, discussed last week, some users have been beta-testing the new controls.

For the moment, the features are only available to 40,000 Facebook members in the United States. Next week, the test pool will expand to 80,000. Once the service is out of beta, the various settings will be accessible from a drop-down menu next to the status update and photo upload boxes.

The company did not say when the controls would be rolled out to all users.

Comments are no longer being accepted.

Facebook is trying desperately to increase their audience, especially in the over-30 demographics. Perhaps they should practice what they preach, and stop age-based discrimination in their hiring. Sooner or later they’re going to get nailed.

Who cares, really?

I’d like a job with the New York Times, writing about unimportant fads. It seems very lucrative, all things considered.

I’d actually be more willing to stay on facebook if there were more privacy controls. As it is, I keep thinking about just deleting my profiles, like I did for myspace and friendster.

Very good point, Ghost!

You mean like that whole World Wide Web fad back in the mid-90’s? That didn’t last long, did it?

Facebook is so weird.

Facebook is not a fad. Privacy controls for social networking sites are increasingly important, especially with the site being opened up to businesses and the over-30 crowd of your mom, coworkers, etc. Facebook is a necessary social networking tool for people all over the world (e.g., election campaign organization in Iran) and if you aren’t following this “trend” I am sad to say you are missing out on a lot of news, keeping in touch with far-away friends and family and popular culture in general. I GREATLY welcome additional privacy controls.

For a new user, the biggest reason to leave facebook is that every time anyone burps, comments or posts a picture you get an e.mail notification of it. The controls are too hard to find and most people say forget it and quit facebook.

FB has the best privacy controls right now. It takes a little work, but it’s not that hard to assign certain information so only certain people can see things. I’ll be curious what these new tools are.

And, oh, Nicholas, FB just surpassed MySpace for users in the U.S. and is now the #1 social network in the world, and is being used more and more by businesses and political movements to get their messages out. I’m sure there are plenty of over 30s in this group (like me). Thanks for playing.

FIRST thing to do is turn off all email notifications!

I thought you already could control who sees what…? And if you’re too stupid to figure out how to turn off email notifications then maybe you shouldn’t be using Facebook.

In addition to users being able to control who sees what. facebook needs to control who sets up a page and tries to friend users. I have had a stalker set up a page using someone else’s identity friend me and then wreak havoc with my life. How about the blogosphere where people can usurp your name and spread malicious lies, all searchable by your good (or ex-good) name. What recourse does anyone have for that kind of mischief?
Good luck getting in touch with the wordpress people. Their customer service name isn’t automattic for nothing.
Within the internet lurks a lot of invasive sick behavior for the sick malcontents out there.

Essentially these privacy controls are pointless.

It really doesn’t matter what your friends can or can’t see, or what friends of friends can or can’t see, if some/all/one of these people are connected and can just cut/paste and/or email or, God forbid, use the old fashion way and TALK to another person (who isn’t your facebook friend) about what you’ve just posted.

Facebook increases connections and all of this “sharing” is actually opening up your life to everyone who is linked to your friends, including “non-friends” and strangers. Especially if you are involved in an institution (like schools or workplaces). Just like the STD web diagrams, you are basically sleeping with people you don’t even know.

So there is no reason to post any private information unless you truly are an exhibitionist. The whole obsessive sharing thing really shows how people are so deluded about the internet. Soon the illusion bubble will burst and people will get hit with a splash of cold water.

This “more control” is a feint to conceal a bigger change: more messages will be available to corporations who will pay to mine the information you post.

To the extent that Facebook does nothing to diminish the importance of, and the audience for the serious written and PRINT-PUBLISHED word, I have no problems with it. But what passes for important in this age of equal access to the soapbox is mind-numbingly trivial and boring. It really is a waste of time and storage to let all friends know how freeing your last dump was, or how excited you are about so-and-so’s chances on American Idol.

So many voices, all of equal importance? I’m up for a bit of discrimination in this area.

1) Facebook is a fad. It is also mimetic. Friendster, its antecedent, was also a fad.

2) We should just get rid of the world wide web and just keep Facebook and Twitter, because according to my friends who live on the Facebook, the world wide web is now obsolete and obstructs the new Facebook wide web of, well, the Facebook.

3) The best way to drive people bat-insane is to use the article “the” before Facebook or Twitter or similar social networking fads. As in, “Yeah, I missed that party because it was only posted on the Facebook, and I got made fun of for not hearing on the Twitter about Jacko dying last week. I can has old n00z?”

Isn’t it time that you “get off my lawn” folks just shut up about technology you don’t understand?

To the people who say this doesnt matter, the debate over privacy and controls users have over their data is raging in Washington and in Europe right now. It is important and has a huge impact on the online publishing industry. To Facebook, a company that has been wrestling with how to make use/money with data people willingly give, it seems like a good move to allow the user to decide. PS – why do so many people who post here seem to be angry or bitter?

This is about reducing privacy, not increasing it. It’s about “introducing” the category of Everyone and making it the default for as much as possible.

By getting rid of the geographical networks, all the content that used to be (minimally) restricted by geography will likely default to completely public, like the default privacy setting for pictures quietly changed to “Everyone” a few months ago.

Also, since the privacy controls are on the sender side, it’s very difficult to look at a posted picture of yourself or a feed item from someone else and know who else is seeing it.

I hope these new privacy controls include being able to control which status you get e-mail notifications for. I would love it if I could “like” someone’s status/link or comment on it and then choose whether I get e-mail notifications for that specific post. Sometimes I want notifications, sometimes I don’t. I think this would be a great update.

Good point, Ghost and Giselle!

Surely FB has its fans, but no matter how much more “control” FB is giving its users, only those who are already into this kind of social networking fad will be spending time staying on top. For the rest of us, it really doesn’t make any difference. We may have a FB account but who cares to try your so-called “privacy” control??

For those who insisted FB is not a fad: I remember everyone was on ICQ like 10 years ago, and how many years you haven’t logged on to ICQ? ;-)

I am very grateful for e-mail filters that ensure all emails from facebook stay away from my inbox. :) (They are still in my “all mail” though.)

Facebook has more than 200 million active users. As a teacher, I can’t afford to write it off as a “fad.” It’s a part of my students’ lives, and they have to understand how to use it appropriately. So do the rest of us.

Social networks aren’t going away, no matter how stupid they might be. (Twitter, anyone?) They’re an intergral part of the way our children are socialized and the way their personalities are developed.

10, 20, 40 years from now I’ll bet the house there won’t be a Facebook or a Twitter etc. It might not be a fad but it is not a phenomenon either.

As for Facebook’s age discrimination, that’s news to me.

Some of us “get off my lawn” folks, daedalus, have been on the Internet since before you were born, and actually understand the technology quite well. Here’s a news flash — not everything you say and do is of importance.