Zuckerberg: Google, Microsoft collect data “behind your back”

By | November 9, 2011, 12:00pm PST

Summary: In a recent interview, Facebook co-founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg explained how Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft collect data on users “behind their back” while the social network is more transparent.

Last week, Facebook co-founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg as well as the company’s COO Sheryl Sandberg sat down with PBS broadcast journalist Charlie Rose. The interview aired earlier this week and contains many juicy details on a variety of topics.

One of the subject matters discussed was collecting data on users, which Facebook is frequently accused of. Zuckerberg explained how Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft are much worse at the practice than his company is:

Mark Zuckerberg: I mean, when you’re saying that we’re the light, it’s because, sure people have a lot of information on Facebook. But that’s information that they’ve put into the service.

Sheryl Sandberg: Exactly.

Mark Zuckerberg: If you look at companies, whether it’s Google or Yahoo or Microsoft, right, that have search engines and ad networks, they also have a huge amount of information about you. It’s just that they’re collecting that about you behind your back, really. And it’s like you’re going — you’re going around the Web, and they have cookies, and they’re collecting this huge amount of information about who you are. But you never know that. And I mean, some of these companies make an effort to give you a product where –

Charlie Rose: But do you find that a bit scary?

Mark Zuckerberg: Well, I just - I think it’s — it’s just less transparent –

Sheryl Sandberg: There’s no light.

Mark Zuckerberg: — than what’s happening on Facebook.

Sheryl Sandberg: It’s the dark.

Mark Zuckerberg: So on Facebook someone wants to –

Sheryl Sandberg: Contact.

Mark Zuckerberg: — target say, okay, I want to — I want to advertise — like I’m a band, and I’m to coming to the Bay Area, I’m going to advertise to people who like a band, and they’re going to — those people only fit if they’ve put in that they like that band.

Charlie Rose: Right.

Mark Zuckerberg: On those other services, you can still do that kind of advertising, but you’re going to find people based on what they’ve browsed around on the Web and the people have little or no control over the information that a company like Google or Yahoo or Microsoft has about you. And, I don’t know, I think that some of those companies have made an effort to give people to give a payage that they can go see all information that the company has about them. But, I mean, very few people are actually going to go do that. So in reality I think that these companies with big ad networks are basically getting away with collecting huge amounts of information, likely way more information than people are sharing on Facebook about themselves. But I think because people can see how much information people are sharing about themselves on Facebook –

Sheryl Sandberg: Yes.

Mark Zuckerberg: it appears scarier. But in reality, you have control over every single thing that you’ve shared on Facebook.

Zuckerberg is walking a fine line here. Criticizing Google is nothing new: the two companies are constantly at each other’s throats. The same cannot be said, however, for Yahoo and Microsoft.

Yahoo is more and more heavily relying on Facebook and has changed from downplaying the social network to leveraging it. Microsoft has a small stake in Facebook, and the two regularly work together. I’m not sure it’s wise to talk down these two, especially when the point is to explain why Facebook is superior.

See also:

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Emil Protalinski has covered the tech industry for five years for multiple publications.

Disclosure

Emil Protalinski

Emil has nothing to disclose.

Biography

Emil Protalinski

Emil Protalinski has covered the tech industry for five years for multiple publications, including Neowin for two years and Ars Technica for three years. He has written 1,000s of articles for both, with a particular focus on scrutinizing Microsoft products and services. Recently, Emil has expanded his coverage to non-Microsoft technologies, including the social networking giant Facebook.

77
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Zuckerberg: Google, Microsoft collect data 'behind your back'
josfitz 27th Nov
I'd gladly pay a fee to to Google if it offered a service that doesn't, collect, share or otherwise utilize my information.
What happen, he and Ballmer fell out?
@Return_of_the_jedi I agree it's clearly the message he's sending!
-John P. CEO at maurisource
0 Votes
+ -
M$ must be investigated by DoJ
Linux Guru Advocate 9th Nov
@maurisource
monopolies must be kept in check!
  • Flagged
@Linux Guru Advocate - new name same fry cook - what a goof.
@Return_of_the_jedi Really. They are all slimy...Z is just younger slime.
0 Votes
+ -
they're all scum!
Professor8 10th Nov
I think dabbsil has it right. Google, Yahoo!, MSFT, LinkedIn, FB, Grouply, Oracle, SAP, GE, Siemens... all make violation of privacy a significant part of their strategy to get money. That just means that, to the extent of our abilities, they should all be shunned and shamed and prosecuted until they clean up their acts.
@Professor8:
Wouldn't it be easier if YOU stopped using their services if you don't agree with their terms? To my knowledge, none of those companies are being accused of not meeting their privacy policies intentionally. The things they collect are known things, and they use them with implicit consent when you use their services. Don't use any product by Google and you won't have to deal with their privacy policies.
Or what you want is that they give you a service for free in exchange for nothing at all?
@Return_of_the_jedi ...as if Facebook doesn't. Sounds to me like the Zucker is still stuck in the 3rd grade running around tattling on everyone just 'cause he got caught. "He did it too, did not, did so, I'm telling, go ahead and I'll unfriend you if you do, blah, blah, blah...
@Return_of_the_jedi
Mark Zuckerber - Status: it's complicated
and that's somehow scarier than not actually deleting data that you've selected to delete?.... way to deflect Mark.

They all collect data that you'd rather not have them collect. Facebook is no different.
This excerpt just makes Sandberg look exactly like what she is, a yes-man (or woman in this case).
@ztapp

Both are complete and utter TOOLS! I'd like to go a few rounds with Zuckerberg! MS, Yahoo and Google can have the rights to it and stream it free! Let's go boy!
Free services aren't zero cost, everybody collects data
0 Votes
+ -
Oh, that's rich.
rfolden@... 9th Nov
really
All sorts of companies have been collecting data for far longer than Facebook, it's called a "free no-obligation sweepstakes entry".
@dcnblues Yeah, except I never heard Publishers Clearing House ever ask me who my friends are, what I discuss with them, what social events we attend together, for pictures of me and my friends, for my marital status, religious affiliation, favorite books, etc. (Just to use Facebook as an example.) Further (to use Msft, Yahoo!, and Google), Publishers Clearing House never watched my every move on the Internet, tracking what sites I visit, what blogs or news articles I'm reading, what emails I receive, with subject lines, and content I communicate with my friends, colleagues, and family, etc. (gmail, Yahoo mail, hotmail)...
So it's very simple and very clear! They ask for the information. They're NOT saying YOU HAVE TO GIVE IT... Duh
Facebook transparent. What a load of crap. If people have not figured out that all your traffic on the web is monitored by one person or another, your delusional. Maybe if your using Tor and proxies, otherwise you have no privacy. You ISP tracks your traffic. Most websites track who comes in and where they've been and what they are doing on your site. FB is constantly adding features you have to opt out of (and not announcing these features) to gather your data and sell it. Zuck and go blow winds you pompous little a$$
@gbohrn TOR and Proxies? Yeah right. That is a load of malarkey that those resources are anonymous as well. Who controls those? Do you? I don't, so I don't have the data that runs through those channels. You know who does? The people that run those services. What do they collect? Nothing? Yeah right. TOR is an experiment.
People have to stop worrying about privacy so much, in this day and age it's pretty much dead. Laws protect these companies from divulging our information so why would we care??? People should just live their lives knowing that some of their information is out there, it's not that big a deal.
@MarcXW "Laws protect these companies from divulging our information so why would we care??? People should just live their lives knowing that some of their information is out there, it's not that big a deal."

Exept it AGAINST THE LAW!!! At Least in The Commonwealth of Virginia. An Facebook, IS THE BIGGEST LEAKER OF INFO LESS Wiki-Leaks.

I have had more Hacks from Facebook than anyother Web Site.

Specific privacy laws

These laws are designed to regulate specific types of information. Some examples include:

* Health privacy laws
* Financial privacy laws
* Online privacy laws
* Communication privacy laws
* Information privacy laws
* Privacy in one's home


Did YOU See that? -- * Communication privacy laws

No-one Has the Right to monitor MY Communications without a Warrant.

Grow Up!
@EDSer1 : You cant blame Facebook, G+, etc for information you're willingly placing in the public domain. If you want privacy, then don't publish, don't witter on about warrants and laws.
@EDSer1 : You cant blame Facebook, G+, etc for information you're willingly placing in the public domain. If you want privacy, then don't publish, don't witter on about warrants and laws.
Exactly! I always wonder what the big deal is and why all these people using the free convenient services on the web are always complaining about the outcome??? If they're that paranoid about their privacy then why the hell do they put all that personal information in the blank spaces?
Even though I may leave my house unlocked, it's still against the law for you to come in and check what's in my bookcase just so you can try to sell me more books.

By collary, just because it's a free service, they shouldn't have the right to collect all this personal data just so they can deliver targeted ads.

Lets face it, advertising drives the "free" internet. But you don't need to collect a bunch of personal data to do advertising.
Yeah yeah... And I hate TV commercials but I have to put up with them to see the shows or PAY for something else.
0 Votes
+ -
Rights? Really?
*Gman* 9th Nov
@CochranMA "They" have all of the rights you give away when you agree to terms of service.
0 Votes
+ -
NOPE. Sorry.
Cayble 9th Nov
@CochranMA

Really really sorry on this one. Your way wrong and the home analogy is not good. Its your home. Nobody asked to come in. You never discussed rules, etc. etc.

Facebook for example, in this case is the home owner, not you. They are the ones who agree or disagree to let YOU in or not. And when you ask to come in they consider it but make you agree to their policies/rules before making a decision. If you agree to their rules and there is nothing barring you from coming in, in you go and now you live by their rules for everything you do there. Its their house, not yours.

As I mentioned in a post farther down, thats where the unaddressed problem really comes up. Most people don't even have a clue as to what they have agreed too, don't suspect it, and simply don't know it. And the problem is not a one of these organizations will ever want to address that problem because not a one of them want to come out and say in BIG BOLD language "we are going to collect this type of information on you when you use our service, and we are going to use it in these specific ways". If they ever start making it absolutely bluntly obvious exactly what they are doing, its bound to scare many customers off. And people who use any of these so called free services are CUSTOMERS, because in the end you most certainly are giving them something for the use of their service. Its just that far too many people don't get that yet.
You guys are missing my point. I'm speaking philosphically and you're listening literally. I'm not talking about the TOS or any of the other rules free service providers make up. When I signed up for Facebook, I did so willingly with full knowledge of the rules. I understand I waived my right to privacy at the door. That has nothing to do with my argument.

My main point is about morality. There was a time when people respected other people's privacy. You can have a free service without having to invade my privacy. You can send me ad after ad without having to know where I ate dinner last night, who my friends are, what my hobbies are, and all the other crap service providers are collecting. Where I come from you just don't do that. A moral person just automatically knows every individual has a right to privacy and grants that right implicitly. A moral person knows that just like you don't go wandering around my house, you don't go wandering around my personal data.

Anyway, who said it had to be free? I would be happy to pay for a service like Facebook for example, if it meant no more data collection. The problem is, the business model started with "free/ad supported" and now folks are out there justifying rampant invasion of privacy based on the fact that the service is free.

@Cayble I can see your point but if you take a moment to look at my house analogy from the philosophical perspective you may see it's not as far off as you think. Also, I think most people know up front what they are agreeing to. They just either don't care at all (like you perhaps? I dunno?) - which is fine - or are willing to allow the data collection in exchange for the service they are getting (like me). And, given the lack of alternatives, we all have to either do without the service or put up with the invasion of privacy. So we make a choice. Making that choice, does not invalidate our opinions on privacy. And, IMO, does not release the service provider from providing the service to us in a moral way.

In any case, most of these services could easily be provided and still monetized without all the data collection. And, given an alternative, I would bet that many people would be willing to pay if it meant they got their privacy back.
Facebook - the company that, in Europe, at least, won't tell you what data they have on you (despite being legally required to) because to do so would reveal "proprietary information"...

Yeah. that's "transparent". SOunds to me like a discussion of the relative albedo (or lack thereof) of kitchen utensils.
I don't understand the similarity at all... every company tries to track where you've been on their site, what other sites you're looking at. However, when I'm on Microsoft, or Google or CNN or wherever, they know my IP, not my name, address, phone, email address, email addresses of all of my friends, photographs I've taken and where and when (from exif data), and who is in the photographs, and possibly my travel patterns and favorite haunts.
Facebook is trying to have you always logged in for tracking, including using your Facebook login to other sites like Spotify, and giving those other sites access to all of your personal information... and of course --even worse-- the personal information of your friends.
0 Votes
+ -
Sandberg, just turn on the lights already.
reasonableman Updated - 9th Nov
Sheryl Sandberg: Theres no light.
Sheryl Sandberg: Its the dark.
Sheryl Sandberg: Contact.

Someone should turn on the lights so Sandberg stops bumping (contacting) into things. Maybe then she'll be able to follow the conversation and make a relevant comment rather than fumbling around in the dark. Not that my comments are at all relevant to the topic, but that was just ridiculous.
I am bad, it is just that I am less bad than the guys upfront. =c)
did Charlie Rose ask any pointed questions?!
What does this guy know about anything anyway? He's a spaz that got lucky. Nothing more.
0 Votes
+ -
Zuckerberg tries comedy...
slingzenarrowzuvowtrayjissforchin Updated - 9th Nov
...and fails. Disingenuous crap isn't funny.

If Mr. Zuckerberg thinks that every bit of information about Facebook users is information that each user has deliberately entered into the system, he's a moron. I don't think he's a moron, so that makes him a person who is...er, being economical with the truth.

The fact is that Facebook GENERATES information about its users via their connections with other users. It tags users in photos they didn't upload--photos whose existence they might not even know about. And it generates information in countless other ways, many of which are anything BUT transparent to the user. And he knows it. The exchange in which he characterized users as "dumb f_cks" proves it.

So this nonsense about being "the light" is a pantload. And he knows it. Facebook is as much on the Dark Side as anyone at whom Mr. Zuckerberg is hypocritically pointing his accusing finger.
0 Votes
+ -
...you know that we (Facebook) are collecting your personal information and selling it.

Those other guys (GOOG, MSFT, YHOO) bad because they don't tell you they are doing it.
If you dont like the privacy settings and your information getting given out, get off the internet. that simple
@tarav804
While I understand this point of view, and it's the stance I used to take, I also see that getting off the internet is not as easy as it sounds. And as technology advances, along with the internet, this will be more and more difficult.
0 Votes
+ -
Errr.....
Gisabun 9th Nov
Notice how $uckerberg says the other companies are hiding plenty of data but offers no proof to his statement and then says [basically] how his company doesn't. If anything there is more info on a person you can find on Facebook than the other companies [probably combined and/or useful].
Just blame Google lol to revert abit of attention away from ourselves, the blaming game that'll work. @cdreis@... Google does hold a massive amount of info on people though, how do you know what they know? and what they don't want you to know?

Google have now started the social profiling game with G+ so yes they do know you email, address, credit card details through G checkout, location through that G maps scandal, what conversations are in your inbox, where you work, what sites you go to, what you buy, your IQ, your friends and relatives in fact Google probably know more about yourself than you do! They can hold all of this info about a person.
Mark Zuckerberg:"It???s just that they???re collecting that about you behind your back, really. And it???s like you???re going ??? you???re going around the Web, and they have cookies, and they???re collecting this huge amount of information about who you are."

So is Suckerberg trying to say facebook doesn't track everywhere you go with it's own cookies and like buttons? Come on, this is like when Hitler said all he wanted was Poland and then he would be nice.
@zorp311
That's completely silly to compare Zuckerberg's/FB's actions to Hitler invading Poland, however strongly you feel about it.
There is some Law, whose name I can't recollect, about forum slanging matches eventually resorting to "Hitler"...

Don't you have any better arguments?
So his response to questions about privacy is that some other companies are worse? Really? What is this, 3rd grade? He's the Herman Cain of the internet.
All these comments about free services and being able to collect your info, I totally agree with it. That is how the companies are making money, that is what the agreement thing is when you sign up and accept it. But, is there a paid service that is equivalent to Gmail/Gdocs and won't collect your info?
0 Votes
+ -
One word.
GuntherGump 9th Nov
Justification.

Facebookers beware.
Sandberg was smoking crack before that interview.
0 Votes
+ -
Facebook is all about social good. Facebook really cares. Facebook has YOUR interests at heart. Facebook loves YOU. Kissy kissy [you know where] Facebook (,dammit!)

Right. wink
Zuckerberg benevolent master of bull-a$$ it's official Facebook is violating your privacy if only god was a slug

SLUG numerous slimy ground living gas-tropod that are found in most parts of the world and have no shell
There is lying that is saying something that is not true and the person who says it knows that it is not true, and there is "lying by omission". To quote from Wikipedia: "One lies by omission when omitting an important fact, deliberately leaving another person with a misconception."

What Zuckerberg is accusing them of is the equivalent of "lying by omission". Yes, the vast majority of the readers (specially the commenters) of this column/blog are aware that all sorts of information about us is being surreptitiously obtained and used by all sorts of people and companies whenever we use the WWW. But is that true of the vast majority of people who use it? I don't think so. We left the Kingdom of Nerdom a long time ago.

So the real question is, is the collection of data on individuals via browsing without informing and asked permission worse that the supposedly "transparent" obtaining of same and more via Facebook which should perhaps be called "data collection by obfuscation".

Rick
I'd gladly pay a fee to to Google if it offered a service that doesn't, collect, share or otherwise utilize my information.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix