Watchdog tells Dutch govt: 'Do not use Facebook if there is uncertainty about privacy'

The Dutch Data Protection Authority (AP) has warned that government organizations should not use Facebook to communicate with the country's citizens unless they can guarantee the privacy of data. If a platform threatens to black out your online account as soon as you do not agree to be followed online, that is not a free …

[Pascal Monett]

If ?

Whaddya mean, IF ?

Haven't you followed the last two decades of Facebook debacles ?

The words privacy and Facebook have nothing to do in the same sentence without a strong negative.

[Frank Zuiderduin]

Why use it at all?

I've never understood why any organisation would want to use facebook to communicate with 'customers'. You have your own website. What does using facebook add?

[A.P. Veening]

Re: Why use it at all?

I've never understood why any organisation would want to use facebook to communicate with 'customers'. You have your own website. What does using facebook add?

It saves people the effort of building their own website. It also saves them the money for domain registration and hosting that website.

Penny wise and pound foolish in my (not so humple) opinion, but my opinion doesn't count for those people, overlooking the fact that I won't visit their Facebook page while I might visit their website.

[Ashentaine]

Re: Why use it at all?

>Penny wise and pound foolish in my (not so humple) opinion, but my opinion doesn't count for those people, overlooking the fact that I won't visit their Facebook page while I might visit their website.

Though at the same time, there are just as many people who won't visit a website more than once or twice but will think nothing of joining a Facebook group, as they spend all their free time on it anyway and it's no effort on their part when updates automatically pop up in their main feed.

A proper website will always give a much better experience if made right, but when Facebook handles all the promotion, distribution and notification for you it's going to be more attractive to those who don't have the time or staff to just do it themselves.

[VicMortimer]

Nothing to worry about, then.

On F*c*book, your lack of privacy is not uncertain, it's guaranteed!

[Cav]

If people rely on the information you post, as a government entity, then you shouldn't be hosting it on someone else's property, unless you are renting that property; you should be hosting it on your own website.

I don't like Facebook. I don't support their actions or their business model. But you can't force someone to host information that you want to post on their private property, unless you are paying a fee, and even then, any such hosting company has the right to decline to host anything and everything. If citizens rely on the information that you provide then it is your responsibility to get it to them.

[Version 1.0]

I have only one privacy issue with Facebook

When Facebook was opened to allow the public to sign up, I immediately tried to sign in with Facebook. But I was told that my actual family surname was fake, and that Facebook would prosecute me if I ever tried to setup an account with them any time again.

So I have no personal data issues with Facebook although my wife, my brother, my mother, and my daughter were all allowed to setup accounts with the same surname many years later.

[Lord Elpuss]

Re: I have only one privacy issue with Facebook

Facebook would prosecute you? For what?

[BPontius]

Have more privacy using smoke signals, billboards, gossip grapevine, graffiti, radio & television ads, shouting out your windows...etc. Am I being too subtle?