Why Germany is banning the use of Facebook in certain states (and why they shouldn’t)

We’re used to reading about the heavy restrictions on social media in the likes of China, where users are subject to strict censorship of certain sites and social technologies. But as privacy fears about social media, specifically Facebook, develops – the risk of censorship is spreading to new places. The German state of Schleswig-Holstein has just issued a statement to local websites that they must take down their Facebook Pages and remove the Like button for the sites. The reason for this is that the state has warned that using these social technologies in this way can lead to you being tracked online for up to 2 years, which they argue is against EU law. Facebook has rebuffed the claim and stated that they operate fairly within EU guidelines (and you’d kind of expect they have to), so why is the ban going ahead?

Who should make the decision?

There is a worrying trend developing, whereby there is a clear split between those that know and use social technologies and those that get to make the decision on its proper usage. As I wrote yesterday, a judge threw a claim out of court regarding the use of flash cookies, and you have to wonder how much this person really understood how the technology worked, especially when they claimed it was no different to other forms of advertising. The fact is, it isn’t. Not even close. And with the case in Germany, businesses are being impacted by not being allowed to use a free and social platform that can help them to reach new and existing customers, because a few figureheads of the state have decided it is improper use of tracking technology.

The worrying thing is when the people who have power are at odds with how social media operates and how pervasive it has become in our day to day lives. When individual people and businesses are being put at risk or disadvantaged, you have to question who should really get to make the decisions here. The fact that the particular German state has put into effect something that is completely at odds with the rest of Europe certainly seems a little odd. Why should these citizens be denied the use of a basic social technology that is freely available worldwide? It contributes to creating an unfair system.

Social media is not localised

What seems most illogical about the ban, is that it goes against the nature of social media. Banning the use of Facebook functionality by local organisations does not mean that people accessing the internet in that state can’t go to other sites and use the Facebook Like button. It is an illogical use of banning social technology that only further impinges on local organisations and puts them at an unfair disadvantage online. It is this that shows a misunderstanding of the way in which social technology works by the decision maker in this case – Thilo Weichert – which makes the fact that it his decision even more worrying.

A ban such as this does nothing except create a division of knowledge and access in that state that doesn’t really serve to protect users. It should be the decision of the individual whether they want to be ‘tracked’ by Facebook or not, as in many ways it can improve your online experience, making it more tailored and personalised to you. The more that decision is taken out of individuals hands, the more an uneven society can develop that is at odds with how social technology can benefit. Further, creating this restriction of knowledge or access in one state does not serve to protect the citizens, but impacts businesses and individuals unfairly, unequivocally dividing them from the rest of Europe.