Recently, there was quite some media buzz and chatter amongst the bloggers about Facebook’s updated Terms of Use. This led many Facebook users to question their privacy and rights on the website. Was the effect of these concerns far reaching, or was this simply a case of media hysteria? Let’s begin by looking at a timeline of events.

This latest Facebook saga began on February 4th, when Facebook updated its Terms of Use to state that Facebook was granted licensing rights to content published by its users on the Facebook domain, even in the event of a user deactivating their account. Future politicians of the world trembled at the thought of their past online identity coming back to haunt them: How would they ever explain those college photos displaying them in an inebriated state? By mid-month the story had picked up steam in the wake of media coverage and privacy advocate backlash, and CEO Mark Zuckerberg was forced to respond publicly to the growing concerns on February 16th, using the Facebook blog. Two days after his response, Facebook reverted their Terms of Use and once again gave ownership of the published content (all those pictures and videos) back to the Facebook user. To go a step further, on February 26th, Facebook published two new governing documents on Proposed Facebook Principles and Proposed Statement of Rights and Responsibilities. However, as of the end of February, not many people were taking the time to read these proposals – less than 0.2% of the Facebook population.

So, where did the Facebook user fit into this ordeal? Did Joe College or my office cube mate really care? I would say they did.

During the period of time where media coverage was at its height, and Facebook’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg responded to the growing concerns, Facebook users were taking the time to read the Term’s of Use. In fact, traffic to this part of the site grew 237% W-O-W.

The chart above shows the weekly unique volume of Facebook users reading the Terms of Use. And while the change in Terms occurred in the 2nd week depicted in the chart (2/1-2/7), the spike in volume happened during that third week of February – which makes sense because this is when the media grabbed the story. And I’m willing to bet that anyone reading this blog had at least one friend in their network tweet about this or publish a story on their Facebook wall.

The negativity also seemed, for a short while anyways, to have an ill effect on the number of deactivations of Facebook accounts. Facebook users who began the deactivation process grew 35% W-O-W in this same week in February (2/15 – 2/21) – the week that captured all the buzz. This accounted for 0.5% of all Facebook users, up 30% from the week prior.

After the Terms of Use were restored to the users’ (and media’s) liking, behavior seemed to return to normal. This indicates that while it did attract some attention, this event did not seem to soil either Facebook’s image or its continued growth in the space. When all was said and done: High School kids went on gossiping; College kids went on posting party pics; Mom’s continued stalking their children. All was right in Facebook world.


Analyze more domains: + +

Done reading? subscribe: To get an automatic feed of all future posts subscribe here, or to receive them via email enter your email address in the box in the right column.

Link to This Post:     


Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.
  1. Ling

    Was the change applicable only to new users or to everyone? I mean, they can’t just change the terms of use in mid-stream for existing users. But they do have a right to apply it to new users. If they didn’t follow something so basic, then they need a new legal team.

  2. greg

    This is really no surprise. Privacy cries about FB have typically been just that and nothing more. FB has no incentive to change their behavior from, say, the Beacon example. Maybe they will get their come-uppance with their violate-first-ask-questions-later policy, but nothing has given them incentive to do otherwise.

  3. Nick Stamoulis

    I’m wonder if the changes have something to do with increasing a cash flow somewhere else.

  4. Bill

    Very interesting read, and to Ling. The T.O.S change would have been for everyone. I agree, I never remember re-agreeing to new terms on my facebook account..

  5. بلياردو

    thank’s

  6. hakann

    very nice

  7. mehmet

    thank,s

  8. venali

    thank you

  9. akalite

    nice job

  10. AYDINISI

    yeah I wonder if you have other reasons

  11. TURKMENLER

    I think these shares was great enough thanks

  12. bassan

    hi, msj 12 wonderful blog 12 share


  13. bassan

    hi, my name is bassan.your wonderful 29 blog. tnx. Msj number . 29

  14. bassan

    hi, my name is bassan.your wonderful blog, 29 blog. tnx. Msj number . 29


Have something to say? Leave a Comment

Get the comments RSS feed, instant notification of new comments

Latest Blog Posts:


Nov 20: Startup-Watch: A Closer Look at Etsy.com
Nov 19: Visa and the NFL team up for another season
Nov 18: Droid Really Does
Nov 17: October Search Market Share Update: Most gain in volume but only Google gains share
Nov 16: Casinos Need to Continue the Digital Evolution
Nov 13: The Myth of Advertising Decay
Nov 12: What’s More Important to You: Bandwidth or TV?
Nov 11: Who’s ready to bring clicks to bricks?
Nov 10: The “Easy to Read” Secret of Students
Nov 9: Halloween: An Experiment in Retail Blitzing
Nov 6: Dicing into Facebook Ads
Nov 5: “Game Over” for Wii?
Nov 4: Want a Tip about Podcasting? Digital 180 Speaks with Tippingpoint Labs’ Chief Strategy Officer
Nov 3: More Castrol Traffic No Fantasy
Nov 2: Digital 180 Speaks with Espresso’s Managing Director Marta Kagan
Oct 30: Apple Having a Little Fun
Oct 29: HTC Poised to Grow as Smartphone Market Expands
Oct 28: Getting The Most Out Of Compete PRO : Keyword Destination Reports
Oct 27: Walmart and Amazon declare war : Online Retailers Fight for Book Sales
Oct 26: Clicking Their Way to Home Improvement: How Consumers are using the web in home improvement projects