It's a big headache, Facebook's experiment in folding users' input into updating its terms of use, but so is democracy! And by definition – as a user-driven or -produced medium – Web 2.0 is more democratic than any that preceded it. Revising terms of service in this participatory way actually makes them relevant. I wonder why it has taken so long to get here, actually (maybe partly because all eyes were directed to predators by politicians and the news media, with the relentless message that it's entirely up to these social-media companies, like their mass-media predecessors, to control the content they "broadcast"). Now, as my ConnectSafely.org co-director Larry Magid wrote in CNET, Facebook's "officials seem to be trying to figure out what it means to run a company where users, not professionals, provide most of the content. In some senses, Facebook is a media company but unlike newspapers, TV networks and even most blogs, its contributors aren't employees or contractors. It's those 175 million members." Terms of use can no longer viably be written entirely by corporate lawyers "for other lawyers, in the hope that their lengthy recitation of claims leaves no room for a lawsuit," as the Washington Post's Rob Pegoraro put it. Nor can Facebook afford simply to "grind" users' reactions and edits to its proposed user "bill of rights" "into the usual legalistic sludge." Pegararo suggests Facebook should put its draft in a wiki that users can edit as in Wikipedia. The only problem is, Wikipedia doesn't need the input of corporate lawyers on its "encyclopedia" entries. The other problem is what adequate representation is for Facebook's 175 million "citizens." If more than 7,000 people comment on a new policy, Larry Magid points out, "the policy will be put to a vote and the result 'will be binding if more than 30% of all active registered users vote." Thirty percent of 175 million is 53 million. This will be an amazing experiment indeed if that many people vote! In any case, this is a great discussion to be having – it's important to make terms of use relevant. [Here's a transcript of Facebook's 2/26 press conference on this at CNET.]
Leave a Reply Click here to cancel reply.
New!
New site, new parents’ guides to Instagram & Snapchat
We’ve been busy renovating our site with a new look and lots of new content. While you’re looking around, check out
our new Parents’ Guides to both Instagram and Snapchat. Press release here.
NetFamilyNews
- Major update from Pew on teens’ privacy practices in social media
- Why not a gazillion ‘likes’?: Getting wise to gamification in social media (& life)
- TMI for parents in social media – for now, anyway
- ‘Noodz,’ ‘selfies,’ ‘sexts,’ etc., Part 3: Bias in the news coverage
- ‘Noodz,’ ‘selfies,’ ‘sexts,’ etc., Part 2: For better youth education
- ‘Noodz,’ ‘selfies,’ ‘sexts,’ etc., Part 1: A spectrum of motivations
SafeKids
- Study: Some teens feel ‘obligated’ to use Facebook – most savvy about privacy
- For regulators, Google is the new Microsoft
- Help Support an Inspirational Picture Book for Kids and Get a Copy for Yourself
- Researcher dispels five myths about missing children
- Snapchat photos can be undeleted as well as captured: When it matters
- Why I’m Not Worried That It’s Possible To Undelete Snapchat Photos
Recent Tweets
Follow @ConnectSafely on Twitter

No comments yet.