Basically, they're trying to push ads pretending to be "comments" or "likes" from you, based on you "liking" something.

By default, the last change set they rolled out enables this.

FB will survive as long as CompuServe and Digital did.
Shut up u fat fuk I hat u eat moar eggrolls lol fatrolls
It would be preferable to see the ability to comment eliminated altogether from the internet, including Facebook. Letting anyone comment on anything ruined the web.
Oshi didn't logout
@3, commenting on stuff PREDATES the web. Usenet was always the most interesting part of the internet.

@1, gibberish as usual. What Paul is talking about has absolutely nothing whatever to do with either ads or likes.

@Paul: I am in total agreement on all points. Places that require FB logons to comment will nevermore get comments from me. I've already abandoned a couple of sites because of it.
@5: Ahh, Usenet. Those were the days. We had us some REAL trolls back then.
Yeah, my facebook identity (which is my real identity, so to speak) is only that. any other online activity i do -- as i have had for years, long before i had FB, as BEG and that's the way I prefer to split it up. Will not comment via my FB account -- are you f'ing kidding me?
@5, I'm with Fnarf on this one. This will limit robust commentary. Yes, anonymity allows trolls, but it also allows interesting comments from readers who don't otherwise have an account on the site. The greater point is, I think, that it is good and useful to have multiple identities for different sites. Making comments link to my public FB profile will limit this type of commenting.

Lord knows I don't comment as treacle on all sites. If they force FB comments, you can be sure you won't see my words up there. It's a form of censorship.
"(Unless trolls create separate Facebook accounts specifically for trolling.)"

Noooo that *never ever* happens. Oh wait, by which I mean "all the time", and it will only happen more often as people think Facebook Connect is the end-all answer to trolls.

(I will reserve my rant about how Facebook is the anathema to the philosophy of the Internet for another time; I don't want to butt in on Mudede's space on this site.)

That said, I agree on Disqus; not a fan at all. I do like Intense Debate a lot, and am seeing it picked up more and more -- I use it, Macleans uses it, one of the Seattle news stations (I think KOMO?) uses it. nice little system, interacts well with other sites (you can use OpenID, Twitter, Facebook, or register an ID login), etc.
I'll bet this is designed to tie in with Facebook's new advertising system.

It essentially allows you to link to businesses within posts or comments. The really unpleasant aspect is that FB reserves the right to sell then sell your post as an advertisement to your friends and possibly others. I haven't dug to deeply into the details yet, but I'm sure FB will be integrating this into any external commenting system.

Of course you have to be stupid enough to talk about how great (and refreshing OMG) Pepsi® is on a hot day. lol!
It seems like this would provide Facebook with more data on their users, such as what other sites they most frequent. I can see the value of that to them. I can't see any value in this to the user.
To further Treacle's point @8, anonymity enables trolling, but it also enables honest commentary from people that might otherwise fear retaliation of some kind.

It would be sad if people stopped typing what they really thought because they were caught up in brand-managing their FB account.
@11, well the "value" that will be promoted to the user will be One Login to Rule Them All. Once you are logged in to FB in your web browser, any site where you care to comment will auto-pickup the fact that you are logged in, and allow you to comment with your FB profile. No more remembering which username you have for which site!

This is why I now use one browser for FB exclusively, and another browser for all my other web activities.

And yes, natch, for FB it's more data they can sell.
Another effort to make Facebook essential to having a discourse on the internet. The FB goal is to have Facebook be Your Internet Identity.

I read an interesting NYT article not too long ago (which I won't bother linking to because it's too much of a pain in the ass on my phone) about how Facebook just wasn't catching on in Japan because it didn't allow enough anonymity. Obviously America got over that three years ago.

I'm always amused when older people say that they can't believe how much information people give out on Facebook.
Fnarf, you're an idiot if you didn't understand what Will was saying about Facebook using likes as ads. See 10.

PS. Fnarf is worse for the Internet than Facebook controlling commenting.

No offense SLOG, but I don't read more than 3 paragraphs of any post these days and jump right to the comments.

Oh, and DISQUS is the best commenting system out there, bar none...including the Facecrooks.
@13 - precisely. Just the latest in "features" that will hopefully be met with a resounding "no, I actually don't need that."
I heard they're going to start fluoridating our water supply too.
@10, @15 actually, you just have to be dumb enough to ever "like" a Pepsi ad or Pepsi page for you to show up in comments as saying how wonderful the new (insert new ad campaign name) Pepsi product is.

I "liked" Ford hybrids, so you'll probably see an ad from me on FB saying how much I love their new 11 mpg Ford Monster Truck.

Even tho i don't.

Disqus allows you to control reply threading by turning it off or by limiting the reply-to depth.

On top of that, almost all of the 3rd-party tools can be customized to the point where you wouldn't know they were 3rd-party at all.
I long for the job of Comments Editor to be developed as a career. For all our sakes.

Portals are doomed.

@22 except on xBox.
I love how FB thinks less anonymity will yield more civility. . . like when we drive around in our cars where people can see us and write down our lic plate #'s. . . yeah that's a much more civil place!

whata' BS argument just to compile more information to sell to businesses. FB thinks we're stupid. . . of course we as a whole are, so. . . +1 for them I guess. :P

FB controls comments? okay, easy enough to be done commenting.
Yeah, this is the kind of thing that will work fine on some websites, but will completely grind commenting on others to a halt. There was a huge thing with Livejournal a couple of months ago where they set it up so that you could comment as your facebook or twitter profile, but which also included cross-posting to the different websites, and the comments section on the announce post pretty much exploded with DO NOT WANTS.

A huge amount of people on the internet want to be anonymous, or semi-anonymous, for lots of reasons, so whichever websites decide to implement facebook comments will have to think *really* hard about the kind of people who regularly comment on their articles.
They don't give a ratsass about civility, that is a marketing pitch, they want your valuable data so they can sell shit, what a service.

The internet, much like walking through a supermarket only requires the least amount of personal communication to facilitate buying a little provolone cheese. And when you see a friend in the supermarket you chat, exchanging a different level of information that is just not the clerk at the deli counter's fucking business.

We are naturally of atleast two public identities, splintered into work, a bar, a movie theater, etc.
People tend to reveal more of themselves from a secure and relatively anonymous position, NOT the other way around. People do not completely display every personal photo-like-list-of-friend-what-movie-you-saw-last-night-thing and then slowly close themselves off (unless you are Kelsey Grammer).

Judging by the comments, most of you naturally knew that. This is/was my undergrad focus.
"But for most media companies, comments are at best a necessary evil"
They might as well remove their thumbs, grow gills, and head back into old media ooze.
@14, I'm always amused when younger people say they can't believe that their info on Facebook actually cost them a job.
If you're not gonna moderate, you shouldn't have comments.

And huge corporate media shouldn't have comments either. Who's gonna read the 399 comments on a FOX News item? srly
No. And if you think this is anything more than PR BULLSHIT directly from the mouths of facebook trying to push itself on every website so it can add it to the giant pile of shit they're about to throw on the NASDAQ you're gullible.
Anonymity is not only important for privacy, it also makes the comment space so much more egalitarian. You're judged only on what you write.
People do love their secret identities. But what about navigating the way back through the layers of secrecy? We reveal ourselves in striking ways because of the anonymity of online identity.

So now the problem is this: If I should come to ardently admire BEG for precisely the reason that people say they want to be admired --for who they are and not how they look --how do we take the conversation to the next level? Where is the social networking tool for that?
The lesson is: Don't use your real name on line EVER.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.

Add a comment

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.