Posts tagged ‘tiger-woods’

Back in July, Facebook was challenged by the Canadian government about some privacy concerns around third party apps and information shared that was taken about users. Many wondered how the social media giant would handle the situation. Would they thumb their nose at the information police? Would they stand up to the Canucks? Well, that was answered in August when they folded like a cheap card table and rewrote their policies to meet Canadian concerns . Well, if that was a precedent then the folks who run the Facebook Legal team fan page (Is there really one of these? I just made that up) are about to get real busy. You see there are several privacy groups who are up in arms about the latest privacy policies handed down by Zuck and the boys. According to the WSJ’s MarketWatch Ten privacy and consumer groups announced Thursday they’ve filed a complaint with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission alleging that Facebook Inc.’s privacy-policy changes violate federal law. The Electronic Privacy Information Center said in a statement that it and nine other groups are urging the FTC “to open an investigation into the recent changes made by Facebook … and to require Facebook to restore privacy safeguards.” These kinds of things usually sound a lot worse when they are first brought to light. Ok, so let’s stand in Facebook’s shoes and let this one sit for a second and let the scariness of the FTC (Federal Trade Commission) being called on to investigate your company’s privacy policies go away. Hmmm. Doesn’t seem to be working this time. Why? Well, because this could be a real serious deal for Facebook. They went from cruising along and just gathering more and more steam in their quest to become a money making machine to now being a social media whipping boy……again. While what they have been accused of lately (breaking a valued trust with their users by making their information, all of it, public unless opted-out) isn’t sleazy on a Tiger Woods like level, it is a serious issue. That’s not good. Now add on the possibility of the US government (you know the one that thinks it can do everything for everyone so no one needs to think for themselves anymore) being asked by not one but 10 privacy advocates to take a look at your policies. There probably were happier endings envisioned by the Facebook folks on this one, like huge profits from data being available to mine and sell. EPIC said in its statement that the service “should not be allowed to turn down the privacy dial on so many American consumers,” adding that the changes “violate federal consumer-protection law.” As they say in some parts of the world “Them thar is fightin’ words!” Of course Facebook has something to say about all of this. In a statement, a Facebook spokesman said: “We’ve had productive discussions with dozens of organizations around the world about the recent changes, and we’re disappointed that EPIC has chosen to share their concerns with the FTC while refusing to talk to us about them.” The spokesman, Andrew Noyes, also said that Facebook discussed its privacy program with regulators “including the FTC” prior to its launch. Well, shame on EPIC for telling on Facebook after the company worked so hard to grease the skids to prevent this very thing from happening. By the way, how productive a meeting is can be pretty subjective. In other words, there is no mention of groups endorsing what Facebook did, just a statement that they met and talked. Look this may turn out to be a non-issue. The FTC may decide to not act on the request of these groups but it might be hard for them to do so. Of course, with Facebook letting the world know that they spoke to the FTC before this move was made may make some wonder just what kind of ‘agreements and understandings’ may have been reached. Whatever they were, they may now be null and void if there is enough of a stink raised. So what looked like a pretty strong year for Facebook may end on a sour note. They’ll get over though just like they did with Beacon. Apparently that gaffe was either forgotten or it’s the policy of the company to see just what it can get away with until someone slaps their hands or slaps them with an investigation. Your thoughts? Pilgrim’s Partners: SponsoredReviews.com – Bloggers earn cash, Advertisers build buzz!

Here is the original post:
Facebook’s Privacy Policy Produces Plea to FTC

Google Voice ’s transcribe feature pretty much sucks. How inaccurate is it? Well, see for yourself. Here’s a portion of a voicemail left for me recently: Play Google Voicemail Now, here’s the transcription according to Google Voice: “.. I’m trying to a 98 so that cool voice can proper with trans with transcribe this message…” I’m not quite sure what’s more embarrassing for Google Voice: a) It couldn’t transcribe “enunciate” or, b) It didn’t even recognize “Google Voice”!!! Anyway, the feature is still useful to have–especially when you’re busy and not sure if you should listen to the voicemail or not. And, to be fair, Google does recognize that its automated transcription service needs a lot of work. In fact, it’s asking for your help . You can now “donate” your voicemail for scientific testing: The messages you donate may be listened to, manually transcribed by us and/or used to gauge transcription improvements over time, but they will never be made public or used for any other purpose than improving the transcription quality. I’m guessing Tiger Woods won’t be donating any voicemails in the near future. Will you give Google your voicemails? Pilgrim’s Partners: SponsoredReviews.com – Bloggers earn cash, Advertisers build buzz!

See the rest here:
Are Those Google Voices Inside Your Head Making Any Sense?

Step 1: Spend ~$100 million on an advertising campaign. Step 2: Let your site go down: Really? Not anything? Sad. UPDATE: Around 30 minutes later, the big shark is back: Now we wait to see if Bing provides an explanation or pulls a “ Tiger Woods ” on us. Pilgrim’s Partners: SponsoredReviews.com – Bloggers earn cash, Advertisers build buzz!

See the rest here:
Bing.com Demonstrates How to Blow $100 Million

In the absence of an official statement, your stakeholders will fill the void with rumor and speculation. I’ve preached that enough times, you’d think that even Tiger Woods would have heard about it. Apparently not: Which is leading to this: With rumors like that, you’d think that Woods would be grabbing the nearest TV camera and setting the record straight. Now, you might argue that Woods deserves his privacy–just like any other individual. The problem is, Tiger Woods is not just a person, he’s a $1 billion brand . Yes, a brand. Look, I’m not denying his right to privacy, but if he wants to continue being the face of Nike, Buick, Accenture, and such, he needs to come forward pretty soon and put the gossipers in their place. Assuming that he can. Who knows why Woods is keeping quiet. He does naturally appear to be less extravagant than most sports stars–more reserved–but he still needs to explain how he managed to drive into tree without any apparent mitigating circumstances. He owes his fans, the media, and his sponsors an explanation. Yes, he does! They invested their time, their money, their emotional commitment to Woods. He sold them a brand and now he’s not living up to it. Just like any other “product” its customers deserve to know why it’s not “working” the way it has for the past decade or more. Cold? Sure! And Woods can continue to hold onto his privacy if he so chooses–as Bobby Brown would say, that’s his “perogative!” But, at some point he needs to decide what’s more important, Tiger Woods the person, or Tiger Woods the brand. Because Tiger Woods the brand is in a lot of trouble at this point.

Read more here:
Tiger Woods Crashing a $1 Billion Reputation With His Silence?