Don’t expect Facebook to have a conscience

There has been growing talk online about Facebook using “targeted” ads on home pages and profile pages. Apart from the original Beacon disaster, Facebook has kept quite a low profile recently and upsetting the many millions of users has been softened to a faint grumble.

However, this week, comments started popping up online again regarding the banner ads that are beginning to plague profile pages, home pages and especially group and fan pages. Graphical ads that include advertising for mafia games with pictures of guns, girls gone wild and singles dating for clearly the 18-25 age group.

In true viral fashion Facebook users have started to voice their complaints and gripes on numerous blogs, one of which came out this week from Chris Brogan. Chris’ post title of “Facebook please at least pretend to care” hit home with many readers. Some couldn’t see what all the fuss was about, retorting “it’s advertising, what do you expect?,” whereas others nodded their heads in agreement and commented “I’m married and can’t even check my Facebook page anymore when my spouse is looking over my shoulder. Why am I receiving ads for singles groups when my profile is clearly marked as married?” Worse still, many of the ads come with the insanely annoying ability to multiply when you try to close them by clicking on the “x” creating probably one of the least appreciated user experiences.

So what really is the issue? The internet is full of much worse ad content and everyone’s’ mother or grandmother has opened up that unsuspecting email only to see hoards of flesh flashing at them before their eyes.

Thinking of how Facebook has evolved, the dynamics and user experience that the site creates, there appears to be much more deeper reason as to why, on one side of the coin, Facebook needs to tread carefully, on the flip side, users should not expect to be protected from the sites growing advertising dependency.

Facebook has evolved almost as a protective cushion around how we communicate with our friends and family online. We can connect with old friends without the need to trawl through the internet, landing on banner soaked directories and malware full email lists. We can add applications to our profiles without the nagging worry of viruses. Call it cliche but to many boomers, grandmothers, moms and dads, Facebook provides an “AOL” styled environment with cute and friendly icons, rounded corners and one central location for them to stay in touch and feel as though they “get” technology.

To the younger generation and the older tech savvy, Facebook is a very personal online representation of themselves and an online social media tool to promote businesses, network and grow brands. Subscribed groups, quizzes, applications of listened to music or watched films, photos and videos, personal information and status updates, all act as an online extension of their persona.

There’s a great British television show called “The Wall” where in an episode one of the characters answers a knock at his front door. When he looks outside his friend is spray painting words on the wall of his house. “What are you doing?” he exclaims. His friend replies, “I’m writing on your wall.”

This is how Facebook feels. It’s like your own personal bubble. Ads with violent and sexual overtones feel acutely intrusive, almost like someone plastering flyers all over the windows of your house.

Has Facebook lulled its users into a false sense of security? With closed doors to the “darker” side of internet advertising? One term to describe, from reading commentary and the general tone of complaints online, implies that Facebook has applied the classic “bait and switch” approach to their advertising, lulling users in with the “you aren’t on Facebook!!??” momentum, only to apply the same tactic that many web mail service providers instigated back in the 1990s. The ad-free “beta” service to build up a hooked user base, then turn on or up the ads. Maybe, but this is targeted advertising, despite the objectionable percentage of Facebook users. Ads run on keywords, algorithms and yes, sometimes just page placement. Ads aren’t served up based on supposed user moral’s, beliefs or opinions.

Targeted ads use information on users profiles along with a combination of various other information (such as updates, likes, dislikes, applications, quizzes taken, comments) to serve up advertising. Sure, Facebook could do a better job and perhaps, like Chris Brogan wrote, “at least they could pretend to care,” however if they didn’t receive at least a minimal level of success from the ads, would they keep displaying girls gone wild ads on male profiles marked “married?”

At the current rate the ads are showing on particularly Facebook groups, it asks the question what would happen if a Facebook group focused on such topics as violence against women? What would prevent ads for Mafia games with guns and girls gone wild parties being shown on the groups page? What system, if any, does Facebook have to prevent such a scenario? And like Chris Brogan said in his post, would corporations like McDonald’s appreciate being associated with such ads on their corporate Facebook page?

While this issue for many Facebook users continues to build momentum, it would be great to hear any comments regarding, despite years and years of internet users being plagued with ads, why Facebook and advertising may need to tread the more sensitive path towards a user backlash, particularly in the leading online community.