Social media and privacy have a complicated relationship, as using social media implies giving up at least some privacy. And the value of a social networking site is directly related not only to the number of users, but also the extend of personal data that the site has collected. All this is of course not unique to social networking tools for scientists, but conducting science using online tools is different from connecting to friends or people with similar personal interests with these tools. One area where privacy issues are particularly prominent is the creation of unique identifiers for scientists, and here I'm involved in the ORCID initiative. We need a discussion about required privacy standards, and about the limitations of privacy that we accept in order to increase our scientific productivity.
I've collected a couple of thoughts below. They are of course only starting points for a discussion, and I welcome any comments and suggestions.
Social networking sites for scientists can be quite useful for anonymous users, e.g. for reading of blog or forum posts. Users should not be required to sign up for a service just for reading a public message or looking at the public part of a user profile. Many social networking sites unfortunately require a user account these activities, and they often nag users to “complete their personal profiles”, i.e. to provide as much personal information as possible.
To give users control over their privacy settings, these settings should default to not being public for everything beyond the most basic information, and they should not change over time (The Evolution of privacy on Facebook).
Obviously there is a large grey area. If I comment on a blog post by someone else, who owns this comment, and who should be allowed to delete this comment – me, the author of the blog post, and/or the provider of the social networking site? And who owns my usage data of a service, how often I logged in, my activity in the service, etc.?
The social networking site should make all efforts necessary to protect the personal data of a user. There are examples where this has gone wrong, and this includes examples involving scientists (Fake Facebook pages spin web of deceit).
Update 5/25/10: I didn't see it when I wrote the post, but last week the Electronic Frontier Foundation published a Bill of Privacy Rights for Social Network Users (thanks to Renny Guida for the link).
Chances and problems of doing science online
Last month (shortly after ScienceOnline2010) David Crotty wrote in a blog post Science and Web 2.0: Talking About Science vs. Doing Science:Nearly all of the more visible attempts (of science and Web 2.0) so far have focused on talking about science, ...
Google Scholar Citations, Researcher Profiles, and why we need an Open Bibliography
Last week Google Scholar announced a new feature on the Google Scholar Blog: Google Scholar Citations. The stated purpose of this tool is to allow researchers to calculate their citation metrics, e.g. their Hirsch index (H-index).This is an interesting new service, ...
Interview with Geoffrey Bilder
Almost exactly two years ago, CrossRef invited a number of people to discuss unique identifiers for researchers (CrossRef Author ID meeting). One year ago Thomson Reuters launched ResearcherID (Thomson Scientific launches ResearcherID to uniquely identify authors). ...