Dear Daniel Lyons, leader of “The Olds”:
On February 17th, you wrote an article for Newsweek about the ways that Google is trying to invade our privacy.
“…in its original form, Buzz showed everyone the list of people you e-mail most frequently. Even people who weren’t cheating on their spouses or secretly applying for new jobs found this a little unnerving.”
Are you trying to say that the only people who should be concerned about privacy settings are the people who have something to hide? I didn’t really appreciate your sarcasm (that’s my thing), but I was compelled to write you a note anyway.
I’m not trying to defend Google because, let’s face it: Buzz was kind of a mess.
However, as champion of “The Olds”, you should know that if someone checked your stuck-in-the-ground/attached-to-your-door mailbox every day, they could draw a few conclusions about your most frequent contacts. Assuming you still receive paper cell phone and credit card statements (”The Olds” do that, right?), someone could also find out what you buy (lingerie for your elicit lover?) and who you talk to on the phone (your elicit lover?).
You wrote:
“Maybe it’s a generational thing. People my age (nearly 50, a.k.a. “the olds” in blogosphere parlance) would probably rather part with a few bucks than with our personal information. Younger people don’t have as much money, and don’t care as much about privacy. So they’re happy to go along with the deal being offered to them by Google and Facebook.”
You’re nearly 50, and I’m 24 – let’s find out for sure if this is “a generational thing”. Here are some thoughts:
1) I don’t give a shit who can see my frequent e-mail contacts because I don’t have anything to hide.
2) I do care about who can see my frequent e-mail contacts if that makes these people vulnerable to spam (See “True Life: China Hacked my Gmail Account“).
3) Everything you can find out about me online is everything you would know about me if you knew me in person because I don’t have anything to hide.
3) I’m a marketing professional, and I know for a fact that marketers will find ways to create target markets, Internet or no Internet.
4) I’m a marketing professional, and I don’t think that “being marketed to” is necessarily a bad thing, especially if it’s done well (Google does it well).
5) I don’t have a lot of money, but I do care about a lot of things (See the Comma ‘n Sentence Archives). The fact that I do or don’t care about privacy has nothing to do with how much money I have.
In general, I seem to benefit more from sharing my information than not sharing my information. It’s the same thing with “putting yourself out there”, publishing books, sharing your opinion, speaking on television – you open yourself up to criticism and feedback.
Or you can always move to Montana, buy a ranch, and live there with some cows. No one will ever criticize you because no one will know you exist.
The marketers will always be trying to market something to you, and corporations will always be trying to get away with as much as they can to make more money. Whether or not you choose to participate, someone else will participate and enable the corporations. It’s called free market economics. If you don’t like it, ignore it, for goodness sakes.
Oh, also? Marketing is not the devil. And not all marketers are trying to sell you Viagra pills.
Targeted marketing can be helpful when done well, and I will admit that Google does it well. Their advertising is Targeted with a capital ” T”.
In reference to Facebook, you wrote:
“The real holy grail is your list of friends. With that information, marketers can start sending more targeted messages. If you like a certain movie, or album, or mountain bike, your friends will probably like those, too. So they’ll be good targets for ads for those products.”
Wow, is that bad? Did you know that this might be useful?
I was actually excited when Facebook served up an ad for a fun bar in Jersey City. Sure, I was creeped out by the fact that Facebook knew I might be interested, but I was also happy to learn about this bar.
How about you give us, the young’uns some credit, Mr. Lyons?
If we “don’t have as much money”, why should the marketers care about us? Why should Google want to invade our privacy? Because they actually care about who we e-mail? They don’t care.
I’d rather a Facebook or Google ad be relevant to my interests and demographic then spend miles driving along the New Jersey Turnpike staring at irrelevant billboard after irrelevant billboard.
Sacrificing a wee bit of “privacy” could make marketing more efficient and even “green” too.
After all, this is America – why do you act so surprised?
Love,
Laryssa, leader of the “Young and Poors”
(Photo by Mykl Roventine)
