

Facebook Sets Expiration Date for Controversial Ad Feature - yeukhon
http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2014/01/09/facebook-sets-expiration-date-for-controversial-ad-feature/

======
CaveTech
After reading the FB blog post, it seems like this article is somewhat
misleading. Yes, Facebook is removing "Sponsored Stories", but only because
all ads will now include social context; in essence, all ads will become types
of "Sponsored Stories."

It's only pro privacy because users will be able to opt out of allowing
companies to use their likeness in ads. But really, what this really means is
that all Facebook advertisements are going to be what "Sponsored Stories"
were. No controversial features are being removed, they're being actively
_pushed_ by Facebook.

~~~
RexRollman
Misleading statements and ever changing goal posts. Sounds like Facebook to
me.

------
_pius
Horribly written headline on WSJ's part; one could read it and think
Facebook's given up on advertising.

~~~
aristus
I think you mean _very carefully written_ headline. As much as people mutter
about clickbait, the art of headlining is old and subtle, driven by business
pressures, technical considerations (eg, the width of a column) and
psychology.

The sentence is true, though incomplete. Facebook has many ad programs, and
has chosen to shut down one of them. That it also happens to oversell the
content through ambiguity is icing.

~~~
_pius
True.

~~~
AVTizzle
Kudos to the HN staff for the quick revision. Edited headline here is much
more relevant.

------
ihuman
I'm confused as to why that's a violation of privacy. Your friends can already
see you Facebook profile picture and what posts you like, so how is this so
different? The only difference I see is the location the likes are being
shown. Is there something I'm missing that makes it such a huge privacy
problem?

~~~
yeukhon
I am also not very clear about what the difference is between sponsored
stories and a regular "yeukhon likes foobar page" on newsfeed. According to
this
[https://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=10100328087082670](https://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=10100328087082670)
they just make it more persistent so it appears on a different location and
appears more regularly than a simple "Status check-in" which goes away. That's
the impression I get.

Doing so I can see a possible issue is endorsement. That is, I go to starbuck
near Columbia and I don't need my friends to know that I was there a week
later. Or I don't need Facebook to tell my friends that I like X group or X
product two weeks after I have liked it. If I want to endorse my likes for
real, and actually want people to hear about this great product or this great
mission on FB, I would have just make a bunch of status update myself.

But FB seems to think differently: let me take care of that for you. Instead
of the user (me, I) doing all the selective publishing to tell my friends what
a great product I think foobar is offering, FB will automate that process and
put it in my friend's newsfeed and sidebar regularly when that product/group
is on some ad campaign. In essence, I think FB is doing too much on behalf of
the user since "endorsement" is a serious legal matter. Not entirely a bad
thing. I have found some great stuff from these SS too, but I think for other
people SS is not. I am not sure if this is the actual issue behind SS, but
hopefully it is.

------
AznHisoka
This is uninteresting to me. But in a few years, I wouldn't be surprised if
most of their users are turned away in droves because the first thing you see
when you log on is a huge sponsored story right above the fold.

------
001sky
_Note: This post has been updated to note that Facebook users can opt out of
appearing in ads by changing their settings_

This seems like the buried lede? Note even in the story!

~~~
frandroid
That's always been the case, this isn't news.

