OFcom referance (794221), страница 13
Текст из файла (страница 13)
One respondent gave an example of how he hadused his profile for a small-scale commercial purpose.I do a bit of gardening on the side and have a small advert sort of thing about it on myMySpace page – Male 24, rural/semi-ruralThe benefit is that this is a very cheap way of reaching a potentially very large audience.Although only a single comment, we have mentioned this to draw attention to the potentialuse of social networking sites in this way in the future, and how individuals as well asorganisations can use them to their advantage.50Media coverage of social networking sites being used for commercial reasons tends to focuson large-scale operations and well-known brands. The advantages of using socialnetworking sites for these organisations are numerous, although there are potential risks aswell.The huge numbers involved in social networking, and the dominance of the traditionallyhard-to-reach cohort of 18 - 24 year olds, raise companies’ interest in marketing to socialnetworkers.
The enormous amount of information that sites hold about their users enablesmarketers to target their message to specific demographics or interest groups in a muchmore precise way than is possible through search engines or traditional advertising49http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=145365&command=displayContent&sourceNode=145191&contentPK=19622574&folderPk=83726&pNodeId=144922.50It should be noted that some social networking sites prohibit the use of their site for commercialpurposes.48Social Networkingchannels. For example, a marketer could target 40-45 year old women living in Newcastleand interested in tennis.Another way of reaching consumers is for brands to set up their own profiles on socialnetworking sites, accepting ‘friends’ who they can keep up to date with the latest brandnews.
An example of this is Warner Bros. who set up a profile for the film 300 whichattracted 200,000 friends.51 These friends were then able to view trailers and discuss thefilm.Experian Integrated Marketing and Hitwise52 reported that social networking sites arebecoming an important source of traffic for other websites, particularly websites in theentertainment industry. They described this as being due to organic growth, such as a localband building a following, as well as more organised growth, such as brand campaigns orsupport groups.The appeal of many of these sites comes from the fact that they are not corporate spaces;organisations will need to bear this in mind if they have or are planning to have a presenceon social networking sites.Social networking sites are a potential mine of information for others toexploreAlthough incidence rates are not available, anecdotal reports exist of people using socialnetworking sites to look for, and collect, information or impressions of people based on theirsite.
There are many reasons why someone might want to search for information aboutanother person, with media reports and research suggesting the following:•employers and recruitment agents looking up prospective employees;•users looking up colleagues, candidates, bosses, ex-partners (Get Safe Online53reported that 29% of social networkers have looked up colleagues, candidates ortheir boss); and•educational facilities checking prospective and current students.Recently there has been some debate about the use of publicly-available information onsocial networking sites being used outside the social networking context. For example, in theaftermath of the assassination of former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, journalistswere able to use Facebook to find out personal information about her son and heir Bilawal, astudent at Oxford University.54 This information was then used by the media in its reporting.Profile information can also be accessed by people who intend to use it for illegal reasonssuch as identify theft and financial fraud.
Depending on the level of information disclosed,this information could also be used to locate the user, resulting in concerns about stalkingand paedophiles.Concerns about privacy, fraud and safety have been referred to throughout this report inconnection with social networking activities such as filling out profile information,51Conversational marketing: Word of Mouse.
Will Facebook, MySpace, and other social networkingsites transform advertising http://www.economist.com/business/displaystory.cfm?story_id=1010299252Hitwise Experian, The Impact of Social Networking in the UK (2007).53Get Safe Online Report 2007 http://www.getsafeonline.org/nqcontent.cfm?a_id=1469.54http://www.guardian.co.uk/pakistan/Story/0,,2237211,00.html49Social Networkingunderstanding privacy settings and building friend lists.
The following chapter will explorethese issues in more detail.50Social NetworkingSection 77 Privacy and safety7.1Privacy and safety concernsThe privacy and safety of users and users’ information on social networking sites has beencovered extensively in the media recently as well as in third-party reports from organisationssuch as the Pew Foundation, the OECD and the academic community. While the majority ofthe research focuses on children, these are issues relevant to adults as well.Ofcom’s qualitative research on social networking sites showed that privacy and safetyissues did not emerge as ‘top of mind’ for the majority of users.
Social networking sites wereassociated with the respondents’ homes and leisure time and promoted a sense of ease andfun. Most users were less aware and seemingly unwilling to consider that there could be amore serious side to this activity.The OECD, in its report Participative Web and User-Created Content outlined severalprivacy problems with social networking sites and user-created content sites (which in thisreport are referred to as UGC sites) which included: privacy violations identity theft(phishing),55 as well as the use of social networking sites by employers to check potentialemployees.The Get Safe Online Report 2007 stated that users had reported looking up their exboyfriends and girlfriends, colleagues, candidates or their boss.56 The report also highlightedthe possibility of information being passed on without consent.
It stated that 27% of 18-24year olds had posted information or photos of other people without their consent and 7% ofpeople had passed on contact details from someone else’s online profile without theirconsent.Ofcom’s quantitative research investigated awareness of privacy settings among users,along with other media literacy issues. Users’ understanding of, and concern about potentialrisks were also investigated qualitatively.7.2Awareness of privacy settingsAlmost all respondents were able to say what the privacy status of their profile was; only 3%were unable to say. Figure 21 illustrates that the privacy settings of adult social networkerswere fairly evenly divided - 48% reported that their profile was able to be seen only by theirfriends and 44% said their profile could be seen by anyone.25-34 year olds were more likely than younger (18-24) people to say that only their friendscould see their profile.
Due to low base sizes it is possible to look only at the age profile ofusers aged under 35.55OECD 2007 ‘Participative Web and User-Created Content: Web 2.0, Wikis and Social Networking’ISBN 978-92-64-03746-5, page 9556Get Safe Online Report 2007 http://www.getsafeonline.org/nqcontent.cfm?a_id=1469.51Social NetworkingFigure 21: Awareness of who can see social networking profile100%80%60%48%44%40%20%6%3%No - profile can't be seenDon't know0%Profile can only be seen byfriendsProfile can be seen byanyoneQ. And do you know if this profile can be seen by other people?Base: All adults who have a current social networking page or profile (347)Source: Ofcom media literacy audit October- December 2007Although not directly comparable, due to different questions and sample sizes, the results forchildren appeared to be similar to those for adults.
Forty-one per cent of children aged 8-17who had a visible profile had their profile set so that it was visible to anyone.Data used in Ofcom’s submission to the Byron Review also suggested that parents tendedto underestimate whether their child’s profile was visible to anyone. Figure 22 shows that30% of parents thought that their child’s profile was visible to anyone, whereas 41% ofchildren said that anyone could view their profile.
It is possible that much of this was due tothe fact that a significant minority (16%) of parents didn’t know the visibility status of theirchild’s profile.Figure 22: Visibility of social networking sites profile – parents vs. children100%1%16%80%58%60%Don't knowVisible only to friendsVisible to anyone54%40%20%41%30%0%Parent's view of 8-17sAll children (8-17) actual responseQ: Who is your child’s/your profile visible to?Base: All parents of 8-17s whose child had a visible profile (124); all children aged 8-17 who had avisible profile (183).Source: Ofcom – Children, Young People & Online Content, October 2007.52Social NetworkingResearch conducted by Get Safe Online,57 supports the view that many people willingly postsensitive personal details about themselves online.
![](https://s.studizba.com/z.php?f=/templates/si/i/noavatar.png&w=100&h=100&t=1"){kind=avatar}
