It should hardly need repeating at this point: When you post stuff to the Internet, people will see it, and quite possibly use it in ways that you don't intend. And yet, either people keep finding new ways to make the same mistakes, or other people keep finding ways to use that information.
Two recent cases in point:
* Project 'Gaydar': This Boston Globe article looks at some MIT researchers who analyzed Facebook friending patterns and figured out that they could pretty accurately predict which men were gay, even if they didn't list it in their profile. They did this by looking at the subjects' Facebook friends; apparently, gay men have more gay male friends than straight men, so by looking at someone's followers and plugging them into a computer model, they could infer who was gay. (It didn't work as well with bisexuals and lesbians.)
The reason it works is that people with similar interests tend to cluster. Call it birds of a feather flocking together, or guilt by association. Either way, it shows another way that indirect information â€" in this case, the company you keep â€" can be used to reveal more information about you than you might have intended, especially when that information is accessible online.
(A further example comes from another researcher cited in the article who used predictive models, combined with follower information, to predict political affiliation based on music preference. Again, while it may be an old stereotype to associate, say, the Grateful Dead with progressives, and while you might miss a few outliers â€" like noted Republicans who are Deadheads â€" the ability to cross-check against the stated preferences of your online friends, over whom you have little control â€" is a new thing to worry about.)
Although I'm sure many audience research, political polling, and marketing types are salivating at the possibilities, any privacy-valuing individual should take pause. Though the logical answer â€" don't post information under your own name, which basically means don't post anything â€" seems pretty draconian. [link via Slashdot]
* Online Compliments Can Haunt You, Too: From the Wall Street Journal, a lawyer who represents corporations in employment cases recommends they tell employees not to post recommendations for laid-off co-workers on job networking sites (like LinkedIn), on the theory that if someone is let go for cause, but gets good online recommendations from co-workers, it might be used as legal fodder.
You know the mom-ish advice â€" if you can't say something nice about someone, don't say anything at all. I guess we can amend that to simply say, "Don't say anything at all."
Online job recommendations are strange beasts â€" as Jeremiah Owyang notes, their value is already dubious, since people are only likely to ask for a recommendation when they think they'll get a good one, but this is a new twist. Most of us are hesitant to give a less-than-shining recommendation if the other person can see it; take away the ability to give a good recommendation, and all that's left is the mushiest of litigation-proof recommendation letters, or simply a very corporate verification of employment dates.
It's easy to say, "Just stop posting stuff online," though in practice, it's getting to be like saying "so just don't drive" or "just don't talk on the phone" â€" you can do it, but the cost is increasing.
Got a comment (that'll add to your online body of work, possibly lending more insight into your personality and purchasing habits)? Leave a comment.
