It’s clear that users have played a big role in building Facebook, but what does the IPO mean for them? According to Chris Treadaway, the founder of Polygraph Media as well as the author of Facebook Marketing: An Hour A Day, Facebook will improve the user experience but will be very focused on increasing its revenue.

While there are concerns over how big and powerful Facebook will become, especially in light of all the data it has, Treadaway doesn’t think that people will simply drop the service.  As he explains, Facebook provides many benefits for its users and has become a huge part of society. For these reasons and others, he says it would be difficult for the trend to change so quickly.

Another group that has influenced the growth of Facebook is marketers. The Facebook platform offers a unique opportunity for marketing, and both marketers and advertisers have taken advantage of it. Treadaway tells us that, with its IPO, he expects Facebook to become more involved in lead generation with consumers and sellers of consumer goods.

In addition, he said there would likely be more tools going forward to accommodate Facebook’s greater push toward behavioral ad targeting.

What are your thoughts on Facebook’s IPO? We’d love to know.

The social network, like many other Internet companies, allows advertisers to target their audience based on various factors including location, demographics, and likes. The Telegraph calls this practice “eavesdropping” and explained that Facebook could face legal action or a large fine if the law is implemented.

In response to this news, a Facebook spokesperson told WebProNews that the accusations were “inaccurate and sensational.” The spokesperson went on to say that Facebook users give their consent to be served relevant ads when they sign up for the service.

Is Facebook crossing the line, or are the European claims over the top?

However, the social network was not publishing the contacts to other users. Social media strategist Tamar Weinberg was one of the first users to notice this feature and, although initially taken aback, she told us that it was convenient way to access her contacts.

In an effort to squelch some of the rumors going around about the issue, Facebook released a statement assuring users that it was not publishing the contacts. It also said the feature had been around for a “long time,” which is odd since no one had mentioned it previously.

What do you think of the feature?

He also points out that these terrorist camps are “well-versed in how to get past our good senses,” which is why they are reaching out on places consumers are comfortable, such a social networks. Another challenge involved is privacy concerns, which creates a two-sided problem.

While this is a very real concern, most people aren’t aware that these issues exist. For this reason, Dodd recommends that consumers get educated on these issues and contact their Congress men and women to encourage them to pay attention to these trends.

WebProNews spoke with Tammy Cota, the executive director for the Internet Alliance, who explained to us that this type of bill could harm these companies so much that it could even put them out of business. Although it didn’t go through, she expects an amended version to be proposed at some point.

As with any piece of proposed legislation, the bill has both supporters and opponents. Those that back the bill believe it would be a move in the right direction to protect consumer privacy online. On the other hand, those that oppose it believe it could be harmful to online firms.

Adam Thierer, a senior research fellow with the Technology Policy Project at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, spoke with WebProNews about why he is in opposition to the bill. As he explained, tools exist already that do what the bill would enforce on a federal level. He argues that if consumers were really concerned, they would be utilizing these tools.

“The tools are out there, but not everybody uses them,” he said.

Is a government mandate necessary, even with current tools in place?

Last year at the Computers, Freedom, and Privacy Conference, this group began to pen what is now known as the Social Network Users’ Bill of Rights. These rights deal with issues regarding control of data, freedom of speech, protection of data, and many other challenging areas.

As Christina Gagnier, Partner with Gagnier Margossian LLP, explained to WebProNews, they hope to get people thinking about these difficult topics.

“We’re just looking for feedback,” she said.

Because there are multiple topics of debate in terms of the rights, this group set up a site to allow users to comment and vote on the rights. Users can also propose new rights.

Is this Bill of Rights the answer to the challenges of social media?

At SXSW, WebProNews had the opportunity to talk to Charles McCathieNevile, Opera’s Chief Standards Officer, about the browser’s latest efforts. As he explained, the company released Opera 11.10 into beta, which has also been called “Barracuda.” Opera also announced Dragonfly into beta, which is a set of web authoring and debugging tools.

Other recent announcements from Opera include Opera Mobile and Opera Mini, both of which are available on all mobile devices and tablets.

McCathieNevile told WPN that all these announcements provide improvements to Opera’s user experience. In addition, they offer support for standards.

“You will find what you need inside the browser,” he said. (Emphasis added.)

Opera has always shown a concern for privacy in its products and these latest developments are no exception. McCathieNevile said that it would continue to include clear and simple security measures to ensure that users are protected.

The startup is called voyurl and it allows users to share their clickstream data in real-time.  Although still in private beta, it’s a browser-based plugin extension for Chrome, Firefox, and Safari. According to voyurl’s founder Adam Leibsohn, “you can trend yourself, you can discover content from your friends, and also, you can discover new content from around the Web that we bundle up based on browsing behavior in general.”

He described voyurl as a hybrid of both a social network and a recommendation service and said the motivation for the service came from his background in digital advertising. Based on his experience, some brands used white-label products to gain access to private information of users. The catch was that these products did not bring any value to consumers.

“The main motivation for voyurl is to create a platform that’s driven by data… with an open relationship and dialogue around data that directly and primarily influences and enhances the user’s experience,” he said.

Although the service has been labeled as creepy, Leibsohn said that voyurl does have privacy controls in place for users. For starters, users can opt to be anonymous in the service, which means that their names and geographical information are not available.

The service also has a block list that gives users the ability to block certain urls. Voyurl is also working on a feature they’re calling “batch recommendations” that would allow users to select a whole category, such as medical or finance, and block all the urls that were related to the topic. In addition, users can remove links that they might have accidentally stumbled upon and that they don’t want in their clickstream.

In regards to the “Do Not Track Me Online Act of 2011” that was recently introduced to Congress, Leibsohn is, somewhat surprisingly, not concerned at all. He told us that it would be beneficial to voyurl whether it passes or not because users would become more aware of privacy issues online.

For users that want to try the service out, voyurl gave WebProNews special access at this address. Also, Leibsohn said that we could anticipate the public release of voyurl around Q2.

How do you feel about this new startup? Are you willing to share your clickstream data with others?

The bill hopes to protect consumer privacy by providing an option that is said to be equivalent to be the National Do Not Call Registry offline. Although several privacy groups have already spoken out in support of the policy, if passed, it would directly impact behavioral targeting that advertisers use.

According to Marc Oestreich, a Legislative Specialist for Technology Policy at The Heartland Institute, companies spent more than $22 billion on online advertising in 2009. He pointed out that a large portion of this amount was attributed to behavioral advertising and contextual advertising, both of which allow advertisers to reach a targeted, niche audience.

“I think that Jackie Speier and a lot of these privacy groups fail to understand the huge benefit that that has for the Internet marketplace and for people with the ability to receive these free services online and, just in general, to get advertising that fits your personality,” he said.

In response to complaints, the FTC asked Web browser developers, in December, to give consumers the option to opt out of online tracking for advertising. Google, Mozilla, Microsoft, and Apple have all complied with the request in the latest versions of their browsers.

Oestreich also mentioned that the bill could impact many of the free Internet services that consumers depend on everyday. Behavioral advertising provides the revenue to back many of these programs, and without it, companies would likely be forced to charge for Web-based email, social networks, and other similar services.

In addition, if this legislation were passed, it would presumably lead to more regulation and government intervention. Anna Maria Virzi brought up an intriguing point on ClickZ when she wrote that critics of data-driven online advertising “overestimate the ability of business and government to protect all people all the time.”

“It is more problematic than ever because it gives them [the government] too much free reign to continue to annex more and more control over this Internet marketplace, and… I would argue that the reason the Internet marketplace has been so robust is because it’s one of the only paces that’s truly free from regulation,” Oestreich added.

Ironically, Web browser Opera conducted a survey and found that the biggest privacy concern for consumers is the government.

Many groups including the Interactive Advertising Bureau, the Direct Marketing Association, Google, and Facebook, have filed comments with the FTC that oppose the policy and argue that a self-regulatory approach is better for both advertisers and consumers.

As we wait to see what the government decides, do you think that this bill is a solution to privacy concerns? Or, do you agree with Oestreich and believe that the private market should adapt and respond to consumers’ concern on its own?

With its slogan of “Not your grandma’s white pages,” Spokeo says it collects its information from public sources across the Web such as real estate listings, phone directories, and social networks. The site allows users to search for people based on their names, email addresses, phone numbers, email contacts, and, most recently, through usernames of friends on social networking sites.

Spokeo offers some information free of charge, but just like its competitor Intelius, it charges a monthly premium for more private information.

Not surprisingly, the site has a lot of people outraged, including privacy groups. Dr. Larry Ponemon, the Chairman and Founder of privacy research firm the Ponemon Institute, spoke with WebProNews and said there are problems with Spokeo from both a privacy perspective and from a information ethics perspective.

“We are, basically, powerless in organizations like Spokeo,” he said.

According to him, privacy is being tested with Spokeo since users do not have control over their personal information. However, he points out that it’s also scary since the information that the site uses may be inaccurate. For example, there are often multiple listings for the same person but with different addresses and other information.

Can Spokeo legally expose this information? This is the question that many people are asking, but there are a lot of mixed opinions. The Better Business Bureau has openly defended Spokeo saying that panic is unnecessary. Michael Arrington from TechCrunch has also spoken out about it and said that while it is alarming, there is nothing we can do about it.

Dr. Ponemon said that privacy cases are difficult because harm has to be established. It is a challenge to demonstrate harm on inaccurate information and also since the harmful impact might happen at a later point in time.

“First, the privacy hurdles have to be overcome before I think the legal challenges will end against Spokeo and other companies,” he said.

Spokeo spokesperson Katie Johnson released this statement to us in response to the recent criticism it has been receiving: “As part of our commitment to privacy, Spokeo offers an opt-out feature that is faster and easier to complete than most other people search sites. All that is required of users is an email verification process, not submitting hard copies of driver’s licenses, Social Security numbers, or other forms of identity via fax or mail.”

Although the investigation is still pending, the FTC is looking into Spokeo based on claims that it is allegedly violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

Do you think that Spokeo is abusing privacy rights?

Gabriel Weinberg is the only employee and is also the founder of the engine. As he explained to WebProNews, the search engine is a general engine just like Google or Bing but is different in three ways.

The first way it’s different is in its Zero-Click Info feature. This feature consists of a box at the top of the results page that provides instant answers to queries. As a result, users may find what they need without even clicking on a link.

The second area that sets DuckDuckGO apart is its stand on spam. Referring to it as “the way Google used to be,” Weinberg said DuckDuckGo does not tolerate spam, or “useless sites.” Last year, it actually removed all Demand Media‘s content and marked it as spam.

“There’s so much out on the Internet now that when you block something like eHow, users don’t even notice. All they notice is that you’ve got better results,” said Weinberg.

Although he believes this action needed, he also added that it is “much easier for a startup to do it, like us, than it is for Google.”

Thirdly, DuckDuckGo has a very strong privacy policy that is very different from the other search engines. In fact, this year, it launched an ad campaign with this slogan: “Google tracks you. We don’t.” Weinberg is quick to point out that he is not “anti-Google,” but he does believe that the search giant is doing some things that aren’t really necessary.

For instance, Google tracks a user’s search history. Also, when a user clicks on a link in Google, his search terms are set to the site he clicks on, which is information that is often aggregated by ad networks and sold to third parties. Google justifies its actions by saying that it returns more relevant and personalized results. DuckDuckGo, on the other hand, doesn’t track this information but argues that its results are just as relevant as Google’s results.

“The proof is in the results,” said Weinberg.

He also told us that DuckDuckGo will continue to focus on these three areas, and that he hopes other search engines will take a similar stand on these issues.

As Art Neill, the Executive Director of NMR explains to WebProNews, the organization offers free legal assistance to people who create and share content online. It provides information related to copyright laws, online publishing laws, and more.

People often ask why they offer this assistance pro bono since there aren’t many attorneys involved in the space. According to Neill, NMR believes it is important to help startups, nonprofits, bloggers, and filmmakers know what their rights are online.

“They deserve a resource just like anybody else, so that they can spend their time creating, so that they can spend their time doing what they love to do,” he said.

NMR has a valuable resource on their website that includes many legal and technical “how-to” articles. People can ask them questions, and if they don’t have the answer, they will find someone who does.

To find out more about this informative public interest organization, visit their website.

City councilman Devin Dwyer issued a proposal that would allow police to share the names and photos of those arrested habitually for DUI charges on Facebook. Dwyer believed the initiative would bring much-needed improvements to his community that has been plagued with alcohol-related accidents and fatalities.

Huntington Beach is ranked top in the state for its number of alcohol-related incidents. In 2009 alone, 1,687 people were arrested for DUI and 195 people were either killed or injured.

Although there was strong support for the proposal, the council voted it down earlier this week. The Web, incidentally, is still buzzing with opinions on both sides of the debate.

Privacy groups have especially risen up against the proposal saying that the impact of publishing this information could be very harmful.

“We’ve seen, in the past, that proposals to post these sorts of images on the Web and on Facebook of individuals who are accused of DUI have had catastrophic results,” John Verdi of the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) said to WebProNews.

He went on to call the proposal an issue of “selectivity” since it would single out individuals accused of a particular crime and permit the posting of this information on Facebook.

Councilman Dwyer, however, pointed out that because of the powerful reach that Facebook has, it could effectively raise awareness for issues such as drinking and driving.

“It’s a new social medium that we’re learning to live with, and it’s becoming a part of all of our lives,” he said.

He told WPN that the council did pass the section of his proposal that would allow police to post the names and photos of DUI arrests on their website, but he was quick to add that he would further pursue his Facebook efforts.

What are your thoughts on this situation? Is this information too private for Facebook, or is Facebook a new means for getting important messages out?

As Facebook and other social channels increase in value, especially in the many areas of government, we will likely be faced with more scenarios just like this one.