It should be increasingly obvious that internet culture is becoming increasingly focused on creating public personas within private circles–we have private Facebook accounts, but we share anything and everything we deem relevant publicly on those private profiles. What seems like an ever-increasing number of major websites–including the Huffington Post, YouTube, Formspring, Gizmodo, CNET, Twitter, and countless others–have integrated Facebook Connect, allowing people to connect their Facebook account to these websites and share their activity across the web on their profile. In 2010 alone, 250 million people used Facebook Connect a month, with ten thousand websites adding it daily.
In addition, the stats that Facebook Connect allows for become oddly specific. 
Connecting the music streaming service Spotify to accomplishes two things: First, Spotify automatically posts any and every song you listen to on the service on your Wall, regardless of whether you listen to the song from the Spotify cloud or from your own hard drive via Spotify. Second, Spotify posts detailed specifics of what songs, albums, and playlists you’ve listened to to your profile. All of sudden, people can learn that you don’t just listen to Keasby Nights, you’ve listened to it 115 times since you downloaded Spotify.
So how does this matter? On one level, it doesn’t. Who honestly cares how much you love Coldplay? That you read that article in the New York Times yesterday? That you posted a YouTube video? On a superficial level, it doesn’t matter. However, what does matter is the fact that the option to share is the default option on each and every single website and program associated with Facebook. Privacy settings are secondary to the purpose of Facebook–to share. Sharing is promoted constantly, while privacy on social networks is an issue that is dismissed until a complaint is raised.
And this, this is what scares me, and it’s already escalated to an extent. While shut down fairly quickly, the fact that there have already been potential employers, both public and private, who have asked their employees or applicants for their Facebook passwords so they can view their profiles is disturbing and unethical, and I can’t help but make a connection between the sharing culture of Facebook and the insistence of employers to invade privacy. The sole fact that they even tried to access those passwords show that the companies don’t view online privacy as a right, but as a roadblock to finishing their background check. I have no doubt that this sort of invasion of privacy will continue to happen in some form as long as users are treated as data-mineable sources of revenue rather than people.
And so where does this leave us with the idea of “privacy?” Could it be long before the idea of having a truly “private” online account is the outlier, the kind of action to be shunned? As corporations attempt to dig their way into our lives and the idea of “sharing” becomes spread, the idea of having a “private” account could serve to paint a target on your back. When one in million refuses to be public, suspicion is easy to place, and suspicion spreads quickly.
So what can we do? Unfortunately, all I could argue right now is that you should become acutely aware of exactly what you share if you aren’t willing to forego social networks (or, really, the internet) altogether. The times are a-changin’, and continuing to believe that your “private” information is truly private only opens doors to possibly negative outcomes.
I would agree that we can’t belive that information is private, when so many sources will demand to see it. But can we blame companies that can learn so much from thier employees from thier own words than some goverment background check? Plus, is there such a thing as Private data in this society? like you said the times, they are a-changin.
I agree that companies should not ask for their potential employee’s facebook passwords. The main reason for this is that I do not believe that a person’s facebook profile represents the type of employee they will be. This results in people being unfairly judged and potentially not getting jobs even though they are the best candidate. The fact that the share option is default does not surprise me. Facebook thrives due to people sharing their information. Also, when others see what their friends are doing, listening too, or reading it will increase the popularity. It is definitely valid for people to fear what is being shared about them. Luckily, it is not difficult to change the setting to private for those who are concerned with their privacy.
Companies do seem to be over stepping their bounds when asking for potential employee’s Facebook passwords. The truth of the matter is, even if people don’t post picture or statuses that reveal their private life, they’re still living that life behind the scenes. I often times question some photos my peers post. Even if those ‘pictures from last night’ don’t end up on Facebook, it doesn’t change the fact that the events took place. Employers aren’t getting a more honest or closer look at their potential employees. If someone gives an employer their Facebook password my guess is they would simply be seeing only aspects of the person that would be revealed on the job anyway. Either employers will accept that all people have lives outside of work, or they will be presented with the half truth about their employee’s life.
Even if a potential employee is comfortable providing an employer with their Facebook password, I think the company is crossing a fundamental line between a person’s private life and their professional life. As Laura said, it really only proves that the person in question has a life. I agree with you, we should be aware of what we are sharing if we aren’t going to avoid social networking sites (which not many people are going to do).