- Israel says Bangkok, Delhi, and Tbilisi attacks all linked – to Iran
- Why Ahmadinejad is eager to show off new Iran nuclear facilities
- Rick Santorum's new machine-gun ad: Will it work? (+video)
- As Sarkozy seeks new term, French are wary of 'Merkozy' (+video)
- Honduras prison fire kills more than 300, highlights regional problem
About Facebook's about-face
The social networking site with a user base larger than the population of all but five countries saw a shakeup over the past couple days as it was taken to task for making changes to its terms of service. After much uproar the site reverted to the previous wording.
Skip to next paragraphRecent posts
-
02.10.12
With new music hardware, Google takes aim at your living room -
02.10.12
iPad 3 rumors solidify around release window, but not features -
02.10.12
Google plans to challenge Dropbox with cloud-sync service: report -
02.09.12
Steve Jobs: FBI file says Apple CEO could 'distort reality' -
02.09.12
iPad 3 unveiling set for March: report
First noticed by consumer advocacy site The Consumerist, the new language changed what the site could do with a user's content after their account had been deleted. The New York Times explains:
Earlier this month, Facebook deleted a provision from its terms of service that said users could remove their content at any time, at which time the license [that the company has to use the photos, posts, and information] would expire. It added new language that said Facebook would retain users’ content and licenses after an account was terminated.
Users were outraged. Protest groups sprang up on the site, including "People against the new Facebook Terms of Service (TOS)," which drew more than 80,000 members. The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) prepared a formal complaint to the Federal Trade Commission.
Seeking to put out fires, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg wrote a post on the company's blog, making assurances that the company meant no harm in the change, and that its users own their information and control whom they share it with:
In reality, we wouldn't share your information in a way you wouldn't want. The trust you place in us as a safe place to share information is the most important part of what makes Facebook work.
But that post, the Times pointed out, didn't make any mention that the offending language would change. It wasn't until early Wednesday morning that word came – through another company blog post and a message that popped up on users' screens at log-in – that the site was reverting to its original terms of service.
To go along with the promise of a more democratic process for changes to the site's terms of use, Zuckerberg invited users to join the conversation. "If you'd like to get involved in crafting our new terms, you can start posting your questions, comments, and requests in the group we've created—Facebook Bill of Rights and Responsibilities. I'm looking forward to reading your input," he wrote.
Response to the quick revert has been largely positive, save for this post from All Things Digital's Kara Swisher, which poked fun at Zuckerberg and the company's handling of the saga. Many outlets, including TechCrunch, pointed to the company's past struggles with changes, including 2007's Beacon debacle.







These comments are not screened before publication. Constructive debate about the above story is welcome, but personal attacks are not. Please do not post comments that are commercial in nature or that violate any copyright[s]. Comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence will be removed. If you find a comment offensive, you may flag it.