What Would “Regulation” for Facebook Even Look Like?

Facebook has been the focus of both public and government attention both in the United States and abroad, in the wake of the Russian fake news scandal and the revelation of how little control Facebook users had over their own privacy. Make no mistake, Facebook does not create a product or service to the general public, yet has said repeatedly to those same customers that it will always be a free website.

The negative attention has cost Facebook some of its customers, with people preferring to keep as much as their privacy as possible. Though the recent announcement of Google shutting down its Gmail+ attempt at a social media network does not appear to have any connection with the issues of Facebook, there is a growing discontent of why nobody knows what actually is going on behind the servers of Facebook.

What the company deals in is personal data, and it sells it to the highest bidder – sort of. The problem for governments and regulators is how to rein in the business from what the U.K. calls being a “digital bully.” Though Facebook has increased the levels of privacy a user can choose when using the app, it appears not too many people are that terribly concerned with the public dissemination of their data.

But unlike monopolies of a more traditional natures such as landline telephone service, if Facebook is considered to be a monopoly how should it be regulated? Here are a few potential problems.

First, the use of Facebook is voluntary, as are the user’s choices of privacy settings. It is unfair to regulate Facebook to the point that it indirectly regulates its users be determining what level of privacy Facebook should be required to offer. If I want to tell the world about the size of my underwear, that is between me and Facebook – not the government.

Second, there is the problem of data security. If a user authorizes Facebook to make its data available to anyone, how exactly can a data breach be defined beyond the user’s personal profile data? It’s like trying to claim that allowing the geophysical location of your address to be made public is a violation of the law. Most people couldn’t begin to guess what their own is, and yet the same people are voluntarily giving up that information to third parties. If that type of data is breached, is there really a breach at all? It would seem that Facebook would stand to lose far more than its users in such a case.

Third, let’s assume that Facebook is found guilty of being an international monopoly and must be broken up. How exactly is this supposed to be accomplished? Based on the recent number of Facebook users who remained loyal to the brand, how many users would be willing to accept a potentially lesser quality of service for a service they pay absolutely zero dollars for? Again, this is not your typical monopoly scenario.

Britain’s legislators have declared that Facebook and other digital bullies must not be allowed to continue growing exponentially without some type of legal restriction. Even if you agree with this statement, and it does make a lot of sense, there are two major problems that make creating regulations very difficult if not impossible. Facebook, Google, and the like likely already know this.

One is that the companies have already become so large, so profitable, and so complex that it will take years to figure out what type of regulation would actually have a meaningful impact. The more than 200 billion Facebook users are not likely to turn off their connections with their families and distant relatives because a government decides to believe it poses an economic danger.

Another is that most legislators simply do not have the business or technology background to understand how the technology works. Most elected officials have no basic knowledge of technology except in a limited use. They range from bartenders to lawyers in terms of education, but very few have a degree in a technology-related field. This greatly increases the likelihood any legislation created would have gaping loopholes that would render the legislation useless.

There may be no immediate way to regulate Facebook or any of the behemoth digital bullies in the immediate future. Any attempt at regulation must begin with legislators becoming intimately acquainted with what they are up against. Until then, the data control companies will continue to have control of every growing amounts of data.


Add Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Steph Korey
10 Things You Didn’t Know about Away CEO Steph Korey
JD Byrider
How JD Byrider Became a Leading Auto Giant
George Carlin
20 George Carlin Quotes That Apply to Business
Bob Ross
20 Bob Ross Quotes That Apply to Business
New York
How to File For Unemployment in New York
Ollie's Stock
Is Ollie’s Stock a Solid Long Term Investment?
State of Oregon
How to Apply for Unemployment in Oregon
Outback Steakhouse
Is Bloomin Brands a Solid Long Term Investment?
Costa Di Mare
The 20 Most Romantic Restaurants in the United States
Ocean Drive
The 20 Best Things to do in Newport, RI For First Timers
Lake Merritt
The 20 Best Things to Do in Oakland, CA for First Timers
The 20 Best Hotels in Tucson, AZ
2020 Audi Q7 55 side
10 Things You Didn’t Know About the 2020 Audi Q7 55
Gumpert Nathalie EV
10 Things You Didn’t Know About the Gumpert Nathalie EV
Volvo's Polestar
Volvo’s Polestar May Be the Four-Door Electric Car of the Future
2021 Genesis GV80
10 Things You Didn’t Know About the 2021 Genesis GV80
Orrery Tourbillon REF. 2GGBP.U01A
The 10 Best Graham Watches Money Can Buy
Junghans Meister Pilot Chronscope Watch Black Dial Numerals 0273590.00
The 10 Best Junghans Watches Money Can Buy
10 Things You Didn’t Know about Moller Watches
The Iconic No. 1 by TID
The 20 Best Minimalist Watches for Men
Steven Crowder
How Steven Crowder Achieved a Net Worth of $3 Million
Don Lemon
How Don Lemon Achieved A Net Worth Of $10 Million
Sting
How Sting Achieved a Net Worth of $400 Million
Brooke Baldwin
How Brooke Baldwin Achieved a Net Worth of $1.5 Million