Press Conference by Civic Groups Including Gyeongsiryeon and Chamyeo Yeondae in Front of Meta's Domestic Agent Office
Plan to Convey Complaints After Requesting Meeting with Agent
New Privacy Policy Explanation Also Unclear... Personal Data Transferred Overseas
Citizens' dissatisfaction is growing over Meta's policy of forced consent to provide personal information on social networking services (SNS) Facebook and Instagram. Civic groups have demanded the withdrawal of the policy, claiming that Meta violated the Personal Information Protection Act.
On the morning of the 28th, seven civic groups including the Citizens' Coalition for Economic Justice (CCEJ) and People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy held a press conference titled "Withdrawal of Forced Consent on Facebook and Instagram, Guarantee of User Rights, and Request for Meeting" in front of Meta's domestic representative office in Jongno-gu, Seoul. The press conference was attended by Lee Ji-eun, senior secretary of the Public Interest Law Center at People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy; Oh Byung-il, director of the Progressive Network Center; Jung Ji-yeon, secretary general of the Korea Consumer Federation; and Choi Ho-ung, lawyer and member of the Minbyun Digital Rights Committee. The civic groups, including CCEJ, planned to deliver their complaints after requesting a meeting with Meta's domestic representative responsible for handling complaints and damage relief.
In May, Meta revised its privacy policy and sought users' consent to provide personal information on Facebook and Instagram. The problem is that the personal information for which Meta is forcing consent is unrelated to Meta's core services. The personal information Meta wants to obtain is for providing advertising or marketing information such as personalized ads. Additionally, users' education background, websites visited, and frequently used game information are also subject to mandatory consent. If Facebook and Instagram users do not agree to the new privacy policy by August 9, they will be automatically withdrawn.
Civic groups viewed Meta's policy as a violation of the Personal Information Protection Act. A CCEJ representative said, "Article 39, Paragraph 3 of the Personal Information Protection Act stipulates that service provision cannot be refused on the grounds of not consenting to the collection of personal information beyond the minimum necessary." They added, "Meta is effectively seeking users' consent while violating the Personal Information Protection Act."
Civic groups also pointed out that Meta did not sufficiently notify users about the extensive personal information it collects. They argued that the posts informing users to agree to the new privacy policy fail to properly convey the information. A CCEJ representative said, "Meta collects sensitive information such as providing data to investigative agencies and transferring data overseas, not just for personalized ads, but did not provide sufficient notice." They added, "The lack of adequate notification clearly constitutes a violation of the Personal Information Protection Act."
User dissatisfaction is growing. Users complain that Meta transfers numerous pieces of information overseas?including location data, other application usage information, posts, comments, contacts, and friend information?without providing detailed explanations. An IT industry worker, Mr. Lee (29), said, "Even marketing use is set as a mandatory consent item, and the personal information requested is excessive compared to other companies." He added, "People have recently become sensitive about personal information protection, and I think this is a disregard for domestic users."
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
