Comments on: Facebook’s Zuckerberg: “Having two identities for yourself is an example of a lack of integrity” http://michaelzimmer.org/2010/05/14/facebooks-zuckerberg-having-two-identities-for-yourself-is-an-example-of-a-lack-of-integrity/ information ethics : privacy : new media : values in design : 2.0 Mon, 06 Feb 2012 18:56:37 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Dutronc http://michaelzimmer.org/2010/05/14/facebooks-zuckerberg-having-two-identities-for-yourself-is-an-example-of-a-lack-of-integrity/comment-page-1/#comment-166366 Dutronc Sun, 13 Nov 2011 06:00:14 +0000 http://michaelzimmer.org/?p=2079#comment-166366 @David – you’ve hit the nail right on the head. In Zuck’s words, we’re all “dumb fucks” for willingly succumbing to his philosophy of information. The worst part is that we should have seen it coming. Excellent point, excellent blog @David – you’ve hit the nail right on the head. In Zuck’s words, we’re all “dumb fucks” for willingly succumbing to his philosophy of information. The worst part is that we should have seen it coming.

Excellent point, excellent blog

]]> By: Philip http://michaelzimmer.org/2010/05/14/facebooks-zuckerberg-having-two-identities-for-yourself-is-an-example-of-a-lack-of-integrity/comment-page-1/#comment-166347 Philip Wed, 19 Oct 2011 22:03:02 +0000 http://michaelzimmer.org/?p=2079#comment-166347 if you fixed your URL's, so that they were shorter, I'm sure you would do better in the SERPs! if you fixed your URL’s, so that they were shorter, I’m sure you would do better in the SERPs!

]]> By: Michael Zimmer http://michaelzimmer.org/2010/05/14/facebooks-zuckerberg-having-two-identities-for-yourself-is-an-example-of-a-lack-of-integrity/comment-page-1/#comment-166238 Michael Zimmer Fri, 25 Feb 2011 16:57:07 +0000 http://michaelzimmer.org/?p=2079#comment-166238 TJ - I disagree with you, strongly. If you want to understand my position, please take the time to read through the various posts linked to above, as well as other posts of mine, such as <a href="http://michaelzimmer.org/2009/03/08/yes-privacy-does-still-exist-in-a-facebook-world/" rel="nofollow">Yes, Privacy Does Still Exist in a Facebook World</a>. TJ – I disagree with you, strongly. If you want to understand my position, please take the time to read through the various posts linked to above, as well as other posts of mine, such as Yes, Privacy Does Still Exist in a Facebook World.

]]> By: TJ http://michaelzimmer.org/2010/05/14/facebooks-zuckerberg-having-two-identities-for-yourself-is-an-example-of-a-lack-of-integrity/comment-page-1/#comment-166237 TJ Thu, 24 Feb 2011 21:56:20 +0000 http://michaelzimmer.org/?p=2079#comment-166237 Social and privacy is an oxymoron. What's the point of sharing information if you don't want it to be seen by anybody else? Same rules apply just like in a physical environment: if you don't want people to know where you live don't tell them. Social and privacy is an oxymoron. What’s the point of sharing information if you don’t want it to be seen by anybody else? Same rules apply just like in a physical environment: if you don’t want people to know where you live don’t tell them.

]]> By: william http://michaelzimmer.org/2010/05/14/facebooks-zuckerberg-having-two-identities-for-yourself-is-an-example-of-a-lack-of-integrity/comment-page-1/#comment-166196 william Wed, 01 Dec 2010 01:05:51 +0000 http://michaelzimmer.org/?p=2079#comment-166196 We are a social media marketing company, and are among a growing group of professionals screaming for allowing people two personal profiles: one for friends and family, and one to use as the "face of a business" which would then be linked to a business page. With so many security issues, and FB constantly changing things, having pictures of your kids on your profile that you also use to keep in touch with clients, and potential clients, just doesnt jive. The problem lies in the fact that you use your personal profile to invite people to your business page. So if I meet someone who I want to connect with, and be able to message with etc, they must be a friend. Them liking my business page closes out this opportunity of a personal connection beyond just the business page. BUT I dont want this potential client to see pics of my kids, or posts i make about a Harry Potter movie or something more controversial like a religious debate on my wall. So we would be allowed on personal profile to keep in touch with family and friends, and people we know who we are fine sharing pics of kids, vacations, and discuss controversial topics, then one personal page that would be the face of the business page which would connect to this 2nd personal profile. Seems simple enough. The only thing to do, is for all of you who want to be allowed 2 profiles, is to go to FB help page, and you will see "make a suggestion" buried in there. Well, suggest they allow 2 personal profiles. If they get this in motion, you wont ever have to worry about being shut down, your privacy, and what you post where. Go do it now, and spread the word!!!! Facebook DOES listen, but you need to speak. We are a social media marketing company, and are among a growing group of professionals screaming for allowing people two personal profiles: one for friends and family, and one to use as the “face of a business” which would then be linked to a business page.
With so many security issues, and FB constantly changing things, having pictures of your kids on your profile that you also use to keep in touch with clients, and potential clients, just doesnt jive.
The problem lies in the fact that you use your personal profile to invite people to your business page. So if I meet someone who I want to connect with, and be able to message with etc, they must be a friend. Them liking my business page closes out this opportunity of a personal connection beyond just the business page. BUT I dont want this potential client to see pics of my kids, or posts i make about a Harry Potter movie or something more controversial like a religious debate on my wall.

So we would be allowed on personal profile to keep in touch with family and friends, and people we know who we are fine sharing pics of kids, vacations, and discuss controversial topics, then one personal page that would be the face of the business page which would connect to this 2nd personal profile. Seems simple enough.

The only thing to do, is for all of you who want to be allowed 2 profiles, is to go to FB help page, and you will see “make a suggestion” buried in there. Well, suggest they allow 2 personal profiles. If they get this in motion, you wont ever have to worry about being shut down, your privacy, and what you post where.

Go do it now, and spread the word!!!! Facebook DOES listen, but you need to speak.

]]> By: Michael Zimmer http://michaelzimmer.org/2010/05/14/facebooks-zuckerberg-having-two-identities-for-yourself-is-an-example-of-a-lack-of-integrity/comment-page-1/#comment-160675 Michael Zimmer Sat, 15 May 2010 19:09:46 +0000 http://michaelzimmer.org/?p=2079#comment-160675 @zunguzungu : true on all points! @zunguzungu : true on all points!

]]> By: zunguzungu http://michaelzimmer.org/2010/05/14/facebooks-zuckerberg-having-two-identities-for-yourself-is-an-example-of-a-lack-of-integrity/comment-page-1/#comment-160674 zunguzungu Sat, 15 May 2010 18:32:29 +0000 http://michaelzimmer.org/?p=2079#comment-160674 Thanks for this, and for the links. I have my own rant <a href="http://zunguzungu.wordpress.com/2010/05/14/the-soul-of-mark-zuckerberg-what-dubois-can-tell-us-about-facebook/" rel="nofollow">here</a>, but the short version is that Zuckerberg's position really reflects a privileged majoritarian position in a *social* sense; in a society where "wealthy white male" is sort of the default, a wealthy white male like him has the privilege of assuming that no one needs to maintain much distance between their private and public lives because wealthy white males like him have the least social need to do so. But when Sennett talks "about the collapse of people’s ability to create public personae for themselves that differ radically from their private selves," he's describing a kind of differentiation that has particular value and salience to minority communities (of every sort), for whom that schism describes very important and basic kinds of double consciousness; when you're a white male, etc, you have the privilege of assuming everyone else to be like you, but to the extent that you're not, you have to be aware of the different communities you navigate between. In short, privacy means something very different depending on where you stand. By the way, one thing I think it's useful to remember about Zuckerberg is that he's a 25 year old billionaire. Such people are not normal. Thanks for this, and for the links. I have my own rant here, but the short version is that Zuckerberg’s position really reflects a privileged majoritarian position in a *social* sense; in a society where “wealthy white male” is sort of the default, a wealthy white male like him has the privilege of assuming that no one needs to maintain much distance between their private and public lives because wealthy white males like him have the least social need to do so. But when Sennett talks “about the collapse of people’s ability to create public personae for themselves that differ radically from their private selves,” he’s describing a kind of differentiation that has particular value and salience to minority communities (of every sort), for whom that schism describes very important and basic kinds of double consciousness; when you’re a white male, etc, you have the privilege of assuming everyone else to be like you, but to the extent that you’re not, you have to be aware of the different communities you navigate between. In short, privacy means something very different depending on where you stand.

By the way, one thing I think it’s useful to remember about Zuckerberg is that he’s a 25 year old billionaire. Such people are not normal.

]]> By: Michael Zimmer http://michaelzimmer.org/2010/05/14/facebooks-zuckerberg-having-two-identities-for-yourself-is-an-example-of-a-lack-of-integrity/comment-page-1/#comment-160673 Michael Zimmer Fri, 14 May 2010 21:09:39 +0000 http://michaelzimmer.org/?p=2079#comment-160673 @Jason - agreed, but the greater concern, to me, is that even without verifiable proof, such reports of Zuckerberg's attitude are <i>believable</i>, and that's the problem all of FB is facing. @Jason – agreed, but the greater concern, to me, is that even without verifiable proof, such reports of Zuckerberg’s attitude are believable, and that’s the problem all of FB is facing.

]]> By: Jason Treit http://michaelzimmer.org/2010/05/14/facebooks-zuckerberg-having-two-identities-for-yourself-is-an-example-of-a-lack-of-integrity/comment-page-1/#comment-160672 Jason Treit Fri, 14 May 2010 20:42:01 +0000 http://michaelzimmer.org/?p=2079#comment-160672 I know it's fun to demonize public figures we disagree with, but it'll take more than a redacted BusinessInsider attribution to convince me that IM exchange wasn't made up. I know it’s fun to demonize public figures we disagree with, but it’ll take more than a redacted BusinessInsider attribution to convince me that IM exchange wasn’t made up.

]]> By: Michael Zimmer http://michaelzimmer.org/2010/05/14/facebooks-zuckerberg-having-two-identities-for-yourself-is-an-example-of-a-lack-of-integrity/comment-page-1/#comment-160671 Michael Zimmer Fri, 14 May 2010 15:02:59 +0000 http://michaelzimmer.org/?p=2079#comment-160671 @Joseph: I completely agree. And I think that's why I might be leaving Facebook altogether today (Zuckerberg's birthday). @Joseph: I completely agree. And I think that’s why I might be leaving Facebook altogether today (Zuckerberg’s birthday).

]]>