Similarly, Google can index her public Facebook status updates even if she doesn't directly post a link to her Facebook account on her Google Profile. If, for instance, she posted a link to her Quora account, which she signed up with using her Facebook credentials, Google could go ahead and pull in all of her public Facebook statups updates anyways.
This is, to be clear, in no way illegal. Google isn't surfacing any information that isn't in some way public. Users could conceivably use their own skills to find these links manually, but Google has just automated the process. The problem is that users aren't being properly informed about how Google is making their social data public. Publicly available information and information that can be surfaced at a moment's notice by someone you know are two different things.
We admit we were surprised by how much information Google knew about our social graph through accounts we'd linked together indirectly. I have always been vaguely aware that Google knows essentially everything about me, but knowing that anyone can look through my various social connections and networks associated with my name from my personal email address is still a bit of a shock.
Is Facebook Really Concerned About Our Privacy?
So is Facebook really worried about its users' privacy? Our instincts say no. After all, the only Facebook information that can appear in Google's search results are those that are public status updates. If Facebook encouraged users to lock down their accounts, they could limit the usefulness of Google's data-mining efforts.
It's more likely that Facebook is annoyed that Google has figured out how to use its data without employing its API, so preventing Facebook from controlling how users' data can be used. Google is selling ads against data that it is pulling from Facebook, putting it directly with Facebook's own ad network.
How the Campaign Backfired
A few weeks ago, Burson-Marsteller reps began contacting various reporters, encouraging them to investigate how a Google feature called Social Circles (used in Google Social Search) has been quietly violating the privacy of millions of Americans. One of the bloggers, Chris Soghoian, was asked to ghost write a post on the topic. Instead he published several of those emails.
When Soghoian asked who was paying for this campaign, the Burson representative refused to name the client. Concerns were further raised when USA Today published a story saying that the firm had begun targeting "top-tier media outlets" with the same kind of pitches.
On Wednesday night, The Daily Beast published a story identifying Facebook as the agent behind the smear campaign, which a Facebook spokesperson admitted to.
Clearly, Facebook never should have hired a PR agency to "raise awareness" about this issue. Facebook itself has a reputation for disregarding users' privacy concerns. Calling out Google for doing the same is the pot calling the kettle black.
After all, if it is really concerned about the privacy of its users' data, Facebook should educate its users on how to hide their account information from Google.