Michael Zimmer.org

A few days ago I blogged about how I was able to check my wife into a local liquor store using Facebook Places without her permission, despite Facebook’s insistence that “No one can be checked in to a location without their explicit permission”. This check-in has remained visible in my news feed, and depending on my privacy settings, may be viewable by any logged in Facebook user. Presumably there also is a database at Facebook that contains a record of my checking-in my wife into this location. Again, all without my wife’s explicit consent to participating in this new “feature”. Now, four days later, my wife had a chance to react to the notification she received from Facebook regarding my tagging her, and I thought I’d share a few more reactions to her attempt to opt-out of Places altogether.

It was confirmed last week that Google is acquiring Like.com, a visual search engine that focuses on helping people shop for clothing and accessories online. While most stories are spinning this as Google’s attempt to improve its product search engine and make inroads into the e-commerce marketplace, I see this acquisition differently.
It is important to realize that before Like.com was helping people find shoes and watches online, its technology was the core of Riya, a photo sharing and search site that allowed users to upload, tag and search images based …

Facebook has finally launched its location-based service: Places. Places allows Facebook users to “check in” wherever they are using a mobile device, and let’s their friends know where they are at the moment.

Facebook has tried to do a better job addressing privacy with Places compared to previous launches of new “features”. Particularly, Facebook brags that “no location information is associated with a person unless he or she explicitly chooses to become part of location sharing. No one can be checked in to a location without their explicit permission.”

But as I’ve played around with the service, I’ve uncovered a problem with Facebook’s assertion that “no one can be checked in to a location without their explicit permission.”

I have been charged with convening a panel for the Information Ethics special interest group of ALISE (Association for Library and Information Science Education), to be held at its 2011 annual conference.
I’ve decided to focus on how LIS scholars and professionals need to place renewed focus on providing information ethics education across various contexts. We must move beyond just implementing information ethics within LIS curricula, and find innovative ways to incorporate it into elementary and secondary schools, public & school libraries, homes and community centers, as well as within popular …

On Wednesday, July 21, 2010, I will be presenting in front of the Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Human Research Protections (SACHRP), part of the Office for Human Research Protections in the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). My presentation will focus on how Web 2.0 tools, environments, and experiences are creating new conceptual gaps in our understanding of privacy, anonymity/identifiability, consent, and harm.

The School of Information Studies and the Center for Information Policy Research at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee announces the addition of Wilhelm Peekhaus as a postdoctoral fellow in information policy.

Registration is now open for Internet Research 11.0: Sustainability, Participation, Action, the 2010 conference for the Association of Internet Researchers, taking place October 21-23 in Gothenburg, Sweden.

And, if you’re a student looking for ways to defray some of the costs, the UW-Milwaukee Center for Information Policy Research (CIPR) will again sponsor a student (undergraduate, graduate or post-doc) for the conference in the amount of US$800.

The Daily Beast’s Emily Brill criticizes Jonathan Zittrain for publishing an op-ed critical of Apple, without specific disclosure of the fact that his academic home, the Berkman Center for Internet & Society, receives funding from some of Apple’s competitors, such as Google and Microsoft.

Brill seems determined to explore (and accuse) whether Zittrain — and the Berkman Center generally — succumbs to the pressures of funding sources in forming research conclusions and policy opinions.

Of course he doesn’t.

I’m thrilled to announce that the School of Information Studies and the Center for Information Policy Research at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee will be hosting the 2011 Computer Ethics/Philosophical Enquiry (CEPE) conference, May 31 to June 3, 2011. The bi-annual conference is presented by the International Society for Ethics and Information Technology (INSEIT), and this will my 4th time participating in CEPE (2005, 2007, 2009).
For 2011, the conference theme is “Crossing Boundaries: Ethics in Interdisciplinary and Intercultural Relations”. The full call for papers is below.
Call for …

As part of the strategic process of changing the name of the UW-M School of Information Studies undergraduate program from a B.S. in Information Resources to a B.S. in Information Science & Technology, I’ve been thinking a lot lately about marketing messages to best communicate what our major is, what value our graduate add, and how we can be differentiated from other programs (such as computer science or MIS).
One thing I try to instill on my students is how the role of an information professional is to …

This year, I am the interim director of the undergraduate program at the School of Information Studies at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. While the School’s largest program is the MLIS degree, our bachelor of science degree has been growing, improving, and gaining attention at a steady rate over the past few years. The degree trains students in the theory and practical aspects of information science and information systems, and prepares graduates …

Recently I’ve found myself absorbed in various issues surrounding Internet research ethics: the Tastes, Ties, and Time Facebook data release, Pete Warden’s plans to release a database of public Facebook information on 215 million users, etc. To help work through some of these issues — and assist others who are much more qualified than I to figure them out — I’ve been lucky to join Elizabeth Buchanan and Charles Ess on their NSF-funded project to launch the Internet Research Ethics Digital Library, Resource Center, and Commons.
Complementing this new research …

In response to recent Facebook privacy fiascoes — the privacy upgrade downgrade and inevitable backtracking, Zuckerberg’s (and other exec’s) various ill-informed remarks, etc, etc — I’ve co-authored an op-ed with Chris Hoofnagle, the director of information privacy programs at the UC Berkeley School of Law’s Center for Law & Technology, where we criticize Facebook’s “perfection of privacy public relations.”

The piece appears in The Huffington Post, and is titled “How to Win Friends and Manipulate People”. Here’s an excerpt:

These events represent the perfection of privacy public relations. Guided by earlier battles fought by tobacco and drug companies, information-intensive firms have learned how to use rhetoric to distract the public while successfully implementing new programs. They are the Machiavellis of privacy.

GigaOm highlights an interview with Nancy Baym, associate professor of Communication Studies at the University of Kansas and author of Personal Connections in the Digital Age, on the limitations in Facebook’s approach to privacy.
The interview covers various important issues, but Baym’s main concern is that Facebook has a “fundamentally naive and Utopian” view of what privacy means online, stemming  from the fact that the company is run by “a bunch of computer science and engineering undergrads who don’t know anything about human relationships.”
I agree. I …

By now, this series of events is very familiar:

Facebook launches new “feature” with little or no warning
Feature is automatically activated for millions of users
Users get confused and angry
Backlash and criticism occurs; users threaten to leave
Zuckerberg blogs that he has listened, tells you everyone really wants to share everything, but in the end backtracks a bit

This happened with NewsFeed, Beacon, changes to Facebook’s terms of service, and so on. And it happened again today.
Amid the rising criticism about recent changes, Facebook announced new privacy settings and practices, promising users more, …