Google doesn’t want you to be afraid of the cloud.

The company announced a new feature on Thursday that lets people view all the personal information they’ve entered into Google’s sundry Web-based products over the years.

The information in Google’s new Dashboard covers everything from your personal account information for email and other Google services, to your viewing history on YouTube and the photos you’ve uploaded to Picasa. It’s information that was always accessible in the past, but Google is now making it viewable in one, all-inclusive snapshot.

Privacy advocates have long warned that Google is accumulating too much information about people through its broad menu of Web-based services and not providing enough insight into how the information is being used.

Whether Google’s Dashboard will appease them remains to be seen.

Google said it will begin by incorporating information from 23 Google products in the dashboard, with more to come in the weeks ahead.

Of course, the dashboard also has the benefit of reminding consumers about all the Google services they signed up for in the past and may forgotten about - a reminder that just could lead someone to start using a product again.

For Google, transparency has its benefits

“Orwell fans, lock your doors,” was the reaction from Amazon user Caffeine Queen after she and others had received notice from Amazon last Friday that their e-book versions of “1984″ and “Animal Farm” had been removed from their Kindle device.

Amazon explained later that these electronic versions were distributed illegally and that customers were refunded.

Amazon’s decision to remotely delete the e-books not only infuriated customers, it sparked a debate on digital ownership.

Richard Waters of the Financial Times argues that this episode questions the future of ownership in an electronic age:

“New internet media platforms like this raise a dilemma. Their owners have the power to control information on the client. So if they have a legal responsibility to remove data from their systems - say, after receiving a take-down notice under the DMCA - failing to expunge it may expose them to liability.”

Melissa J. Perenson of PC World asks if you can still call it “owning”:

If, in this digital realm, we’re not truly purchasing content, but rather “borrowing” it at a set price, and according to someone else’s changing rulebook, we as consumers we deserve to know this up front, in clear and obvious language (unlike Amazon’s clear references to “buying” books, and all the assumptions of ownership that go with buying books). If the rules have changed on us, we deserve to know.

Meanwhile, user Steve Holden offers his Kindle in the forum: “If I change my mind later I’ll just take it back and return your money. This isn’t digital rights, it’s digital wrongs.”

Facebook is super easy to use in many respects. Send out that snarky message and the whole world knows what’s on your mind. But even though the site’s managers have tried to give users privacy options, figuring out how to limit who can read your murkiest thoughts has been less than straightforward.

The “compounding effect of more and more settings has made controlling privacy on Facebook too complicated,” Chief Privacy Officer Chris Kelly said on the Facebook blog.

As a result the social network site is now testing new ways for members to improve their privacy controls more easily.  This should mean that when you post those embarrassing photos or irreverent comments, you’ll be able to easily control who sees them without having to worry about oversharing with your boss or professional acquaintances.

But when you’ve got something big to say — like “There’s a plane on the Hudson” — Facebook will also give you the option to broadcast to everybody.

“You will have the choice of being as open or as limited in the sharing of this information as you want,” Facebook promised.

However, the tests, launched yesterday and expected to continue for a few weeks, will only include a small fraction of Facebook members before the company is ready to offer final versions.

According to the New York Times, Facebook is still determining if status updates that users chose to make public would appear in results from search engines like Google but it told the newspaper that it was testing a search engine that would be able to scan through this material.

Keep an Eye On:

• Google drops News Comment Feature (New York Times)
• DirecTV reaches out to Sling Media founder Krikorian as CEO candidate (PaidContent.org)
• Murdoch denies plot to acquire New York Times (thestreet.com)
• Microsoft adds Twitter search to Bing (Businessinsider)

(Reuters Photo: Facebook CEO Zuckerberg in July 2008)

The targeted online advertising company Phorm, which has been accused of spying, breaking the law and just about everything else in the last year, has launched its latest charm offensive in its battle to prove its innocence.

The British company sparked damning headlines last year when  it signed up the three biggest Internet service providers BT, Virgin Media and Carphone Warehouse to provide adverts to Web
sites based on the surfing trends of users.

Phorm says the system is completely anonymous, does not store data on its users and will enable online publishers to make more money by showing more relevant adverts. With more interesting ads, there would also be fewer needed, they say.

Its service, which is yet to launch, has been welcomed by the media regulator and minister in charge of planning Britain's digital future.

But its critics, who have formed Web sites, campaigns and a devoted following, say the company is "snooping" on online users and selling their surfing habits to advertising companies.

In its drive to win the PR battle, Phorm held its second "Town Hall" meeting on Tuesday evening to discuss the public's concerns and questions.

Far from feisty, the meeting was a mostly civil affair although the top table, led by former Chancellor and non-executive director Norman Lamont, still faced many questions on how they handle the data.

The rather tall men with wires dangling from their ears, looking suspiciously like security guards, had a quiet evening.

Chief Executive Kent Ertugrul, sounding somewhat exasperated at times, painted Phorm's opponents as a small fringe who had managed to create a lot of noise.

Phorm says customers will be given a choice as to whether they use the Webwise service and hinted that customers could be given incentives to sign up, saying reduced broadband connections or a donation to charity was being considered by the company.

They said they would gladly welcome a UN weapons "Hans Blix"-type inspector who could verify their promise of anonymity, but without that, would continue to answer as many questions as were put to them.

Would you consider using the technology to see more relevant ads or do you think Phorm is going a step too far.

One day after Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said the social networking site would stand by its revised terms of use, he capitulated and said Facebook would return to its old terms while “we resolve the issues that people have raised.”

Zuckerberg said Facebook would work on a “substantial revision.” In the meantime, members can voice their opinions — or as the case has been, give vent to their outrage — through “Facebook Bill of Rights and Responsibilities,” a group created by the networking site.

Here’s a sampling of the 4,229 wall posts so far:

“you guys are a major corp and you think im to believe for a second that you would not share all of our information to make some money for yourselves……PLEASE TELL US ALL ANOTHER LIE!!!!!!!!!!” (James Stull, Montreal, QC)

“The TOS also needs to address the way businesses and professionals are using facebook. If publishers, theatre groups, musicians, art galleries & museums, writers, comedians, artists, etc are setting up groups or fan pages and posting teasers, videos, images and the like, how is that copyrighted intellectual property protected?” (Martha Mihalick, New York)

“Simply, do away with any BS and get down to terms that protect people’s rights and privacy and let’s move forward with a Facebook that everyone can be proud to be a part of. It always amazes me when a small company goes big, how quickly they proprietors can lose there humanity and moral judgement.” (Silvana Scotto Zangri, New York)

Evidently, it’s hard to tout your 175 million members and then ignore their wishes.

Keep an eye on:

• The Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, where the talk is all netbooks and smartphones. (Reuters)
• TV stations go digital, deadlines or not. (New York Times)
• EchoStar’s Charlie Ergen. He may still come back to scuttle the Liberty-Sirius deal. (WSJ)
• Comcast, which reported better-than-expected profit but said it lost subscribers and warned that advertising sales would be under pressure this year as well. (Reuters)

(Photo: Reuters)

Google and Viacom reached a late night accord on safeguarding the anonymity of Google YouTube viewers. Google will no longer have to hand over the user names and IP addresses of its viewers.

But what of the scuffle around the viewership data of Google and YouTube’s own employees? CNET’s Greg Sandoval reported last week the negotiations stalled on Google’s unwillingness to turn over information on its own employees, citing unnamed sources.

In other words, how would Viacom’s $1 billion copyright infringement suit against Google turn out if the data showed YouTube co-founder Chad Hurley viewing and uploading “Colbert Report” videos?

No word on this yet.

(Reuters)

Keep an eye on:

• Microsoft says the Xbox 360 will outsell Sony’s PS3 over the lifetime of the consoles. (Reuters)
• Provigil: the drug of choice for Silicon Valley entrepreneurs. (TechCrunch)
• Carl Icahn to Yahoo’s Jerry Yang: “‘I like you, but I have to get rid of you.” (NYTimes)
• AOL launches personal finance site Walletpop. (Reuters)
• Netflix subscribers can soon watch streamed movies over the Xbox 360. (Reuters)

(Photo: Reuters / Andrew Winning / Protesters take part in an Amnesty International demonstration in Belfast (2008))