Now there was I thinking all these new age brands still embodied the spirit of anarchic libertarianism inherent in early internet culture. But last week, Facebook was forced to abandon their plan of holding your personal data, messages and photographs for the rest of eternity, even if you'd closed your account. In 2007 entrepreneurial darlings Innocent drinks had an ASA ruling upheld against them, after claiming one of their smoothies was better for you than the recommended 5 a day fruit and veg. The mighty Google has got itself into an awful twist over Chinese censorship and even Youtube, once it became part of the Viacom empire, was obliged to clamp down on all the sort of stuff people actually wanted to see.
Cynical old farts like myself recognise "we're on your side" mateyness for what it usually is. An attempt to position a brand as the consumer's friend whilst trying to make money of them. You see a similar tack taken by global corporations presenting their "green credentials supporting local communities" whilst their factories pollute many of those same communities. In a capitalist society, brands are driven by shareholder demands. Customer data, which Facebook has in abundance, equates to money. And while trampling over data concerns is not the moral equivalent of employing sweatshops to make absurdly cheap clothes, not much is ever allowed to get in the way of making a fast buck. It is naive to believe otherwise.
