Share
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • X
  • Threads

IP Whiteboard

Federal Election 2013: who will be watching you?

14 August 2013

The 2013 Australian Federal Election has already been coined the ‘Social Media Election’, but even savvy users who frequently turn to social media platforms to track trending political issues may have been surprised by last week’s announcement that Yahoo!7 and Seven News were partnering with Facebook to provide unique insights into Australian opinions on the election.  Unlike Twitter, which is known as a public forum, many users view Facebook as a more ‘private’ or ‘restricted’ space for sharing content.  We wondered whether this partnership may see individual users’ status updates shared on news broadcasts, and decided to investigate.

How will the collaboration work?

The partnership will use insights from active political conversations happening on Facebook, by monitoring the 12 million active local users’ Likes, Shares, comments and engagement with political Pages.  These insights will then be translated to numerical data to be used in Seven News coverage as well as across the Yahoo!7 network.  For example, the first insight published on Facebook earlier this week stated that there had been an “1800% increase in mentions of Kevin Rudd versus a 3271% increase in mentions of Tony Abbott this past week”.  Facebook formed a similar partnership with CNN last year to cover the US election.

Can Facebook do this?

According to Facebook’s Data Use Policy, Facebook is allowed to share and publish this user information if it has:

  • received your permission;
  • given you notice, such as by telling you about it in its policy; or
  • removed your name or any other personally identifying information from it.

Facebook says it also puts together data from the information it has about you, but that it only provides data to its advertising partners or customers after it has removed your name or any other personally identifying information from it, or has combined it with other people’s data in a way that it is no longer associated with you.  The first insight published involves only numerical data, with no personally identifying user information, so Facebook’s conduct appears consistent with its policy.

However, Facebook users beware! If you choose to make your information public by ticking the ‘public’ option in the drop box of a status, then Facebook considers this information “Everyone Information”, and anyone, including people who are not on Facebook, will be able to see it.  To prevent your name (or personally identifiable information) being splashed over a public medium, including Seven News’ election coverage, always ensure that the “Friends” or even “Friends except Acquaintances” option is selected when preparing a Facebook Post.  [Eds: Facebook also offers an “Only me” option, although we are not sure who would select this, given Facebook is supposed to be a “social” network]

What can we expect for the future of federal elections? With Facebook recently revealing that it plans to sell TV style advertising (at a measly $USD1m for a 15-second spot or $US2.5 million a day), perhaps by 2016, our attempts to browse the latest weekend gossip will be interrupted by 15-second political campaigns taking over our newsfeeds.

Share
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • X
  • Threads

More Posts From This Author

Trade marks wars: Louboutin’s red soled stilettos are back in the spotlight

25 October 2013
The trade mark wars for Louboutin continue, this time in an intriguing dispute in Belgium concerning the use of the iconic shoes on a poster for political advertising. Here’s what happened…. Recently in Belgium’s Antwerp Court, Louboutin claimed that the Vlaams Belang party infringed its registered trade mark for the colour red (Pantone 18-0663TP) applied to the sole of shoes (Benelux Trade Mark No. 0874489) by producing a political advertisement condemning Islam, which showed a woman lifting up a black dress whilst wearing Louboutin’s red soled stilettos. Words were etched along her bare legs which marked potential skirt lengths, ranging from “Sharia compatible” at the ankle to “stoning” high up on the thigh. To view the advertisement, click here. The woman featured in Valaams Belang’s advertisement was Anke Van Dermeersch, a former Miss Belgium and now senator of Vlaams Belang, who turned up to the Antwerp Court hearing wearing Louboutin’s iconic red soled stilettos.
Read on

Why all the secrecy? Tom Waterhouse defamation settlement reignites court access debate

3 October 2013
Imagine you are an “A” type lawyer keen to know what’s going on. Yes, that’s most of us at IP Whiteboard. It means we were frustrated some time ago when told by the NSW District Court that pleadings in the Tom Waterhouse v Fairfax Media defamation case were unavailable for review. Our previous post here explains the policy rationale. Our curiosity was to some extent assuaged recently by an SMH article entitled “Tom Waterhouse loses defamation case against Peter FitzSimons”, where the headline speaks for itself. However, we wanted to learn more.
Read on

Re-thinking the role of IP: a lecture by Dr Francis Gurry

29 August 2013
The world’s wealth is increasingly becoming centred on intellectual capital, according to Dr Francis Gurry at his presentation at Melbourne University on Thursday 22 August 2013. Dr Gurry is the Director General of the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO), and the highest-ranking Australian official in a United Nations agency. The organisers of the fifth annual Francis Gurry Lecture on Intellectual Property were privileged to have the Lecture’s namesake present on “Re-thinking the role of IP”, exploring the major economic, social and political developments affecting intellectual property.
Read on