WhatsApp and respect for privacy
WhatsApp’s decision to introduce the now famous blue double tick confirming that a message has been read without providing recipients of messages with an alternative has prompted me to dedicate my weekly column in Spain’s leading financial daily Expansión to the subject of respect for privacy (pdf in Spanish).
In the first place, the idea of letting somebody know that the message they have sent has been read is a bad one, and is hardly ground-breaking from a technological point of view. But if it had always been a feature of WhatsApp, nobody would have minded: it would have been simply how the thing worked, and from now on that will be what new users find. But the thing is that users have not asked for this feature to be introduced, and they have not be warned about it, nor do they have any choice. In short, changing the way that the user is perceived by the interlocutor, or that provide information is a breach of privacy and likely to give rise to misunderstandings and problems, and clearly shows that WhatsApp puts its own interests above those of the user.
Changing the rules of a communication tool when it has already accrued a significant number of users across a wide demographic, and to do it in this way, makes one wonder about the company’s priorities. This is the same company that for a long time refused to encrypt users’ written communications on the basis that text messages were not ciphered, and only did so begrudgingly.
WhatsApp has once again shown that it is not on the case, and struggling to manage. The massive uptake of the service in some countries is not a triumph of entrepreneurship, but simply what happens when an irresponsible company offers a service to a market without thinking about the possible repercussions. Is WhatsApp’s supposed simplicity based on a brilliant idea? No, its simplicity is the result of management failures the company has consistently refused to address.
WhatsApp is now working flat out to make the blue double tick optional, at the same time as its founder, Jan Koum, is going out of his way to say that he has no intention of trying to make money out of the application. We can only hope that over time, more of us give us little thought before we decide to use this or that social network.
Below, the text in full:
WhatsApp and respect for privacy
This week there has been a lot of talk about the introduction of a new feature on Spain’s most popular instant messaging service, WhatsApp: a blue double tick indicating that the recipient of a message has read it.
The problem with introducing changes like this to a service like WhatsApp is that it can lead to all sorts of misunderstandings between users. Furthermore, if this feature provides more data about the message and is introduced without providing an opt-out, it is quiet simply a breach of privacy. It’s not really about what information might be made available or not: it’s the attitude that lies behind the decision.
A lack of sensitivity toward its users has been a constant with WhatsApp since the beginning: a small company focused on the efficiency of its systems at the expense of features. Not encrypting messages or doing so insecurely cannot be justified on the basis that text messages used not to be encrypted, and is potentially compromising users who have placed their trust in the company.
WhatsApp has since decided to provide an opt-out for the double tick after receiving numerous complaints. In reality, the issue is not about its design or whether it is even intrusive: if it had been there from the start then people could have made a decision on whether to take up the service on that basis. The problem here is that the feature was introduced by the back door.
Respecting your customers is one of the most basic tenets of doing business. And when those customers have the social networks at their disposal, respecting them becomes absolutely paramount.
(En español, aquí)
