Facebook chose Bing over Google because of privacy concerns


When Mark Zuckerberg announced Graph Search yesterday, he revealed a closer partnership with Bing.

Microsoft and Facebook have formed a close business alliance over the years, but it wasn't always that way, Facebook co-founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg has said.

At one point, Facebook was a considering an alliance with Google, but eventually it decided against such a move because of privacy concerns. Google refused to allow Facebook the right to remove information from Google's listings when Facebook users changed publicly available content to private content, according to a report by Bloomberg BusinessWeek.

Zuckerberg said Google's decision caused Facebook's discussions for a potential deal with the search giant to collapse, as BusinessWeek reports:

When Facebook cannot answer a user's query, it will return results from Microsoft's Bing search engine, as part of a partnership between the two companies that started in 2007. When asked why the company was not working with Google, Zuckerberg said that previous discussions collapsed over Google's unwillingness to accommodate Facebook's privacy needs. For example, he said, Facebook wants its search engine partners to remove certain pieces of content from its index, such as photos, when its users change the privacy setting.

Google's loss has been Microsoft's gain, as yesterday Facebook and Microsoft announced increased Bing integration in the former company's new Graph Search.

Source: Bloomberg BusinessWeek via Talking Points Memo | Image via Facebook

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Xbox Live account migration tool goes live for all users

Next Story

Pokki revamps Windows 8 Start menu program; hits 1.5 million downloads

27 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Wow, people defending Google's privacy OVER Microsoft and OVER Facebook. Do people not pay attention or just selectively instill their own belief systems?

This is why Apple DUMPED Google Maps because they WOULD NOT create a version of their mapping that didn't 'log' the user tracking data. So if Apple couldn't get the privacy they wanted out of Google, is it really so hard to believe that Google would not agree to Facebook's terms of not tracking user account information?

(Apple and Google were jointly sued in several countries because of Google's mapping software on iPhone that tracked users and retained the location information. This was the start of Apple wanting Google to STOP invading their customer's privacy. This is also a bit 'telling' as Apple is not so great about customer privacy themselves, yet Google's invasion of privacy was beyond what Apple would allow as well.)

I swear, Google could give away free licks of a donkey dong and people would stand in line to get their tongue on it.

Seems pretty obvious to me. Google as a whole will live or die based on their ability to collect every single last piece of data available out there.

Not that I'm defending FB when it comes to privacy.

I'm glad at least that they chose Microsoft over Google. It's one thing to block Google Maps on Windows Phone, but not giving Microsoft the data to make a great YouTube app, that's really making me lose interest in Google.

And yes, I know Microsoft's had a shady past in the '90s, but they paid for their mistakes. Now, it's Google's turn.

Bing would have given Facebook what ever terms they wanted. Anything to get people using their search engine.

In a world where no one company should be too big, I would like more competition with google in the search engine world. Microsoft has the computer OS market locked down, and I would like to see that dwindle. Competition benefits the consumer the most, while also helping to make the big companies look good because they kind of have to look good to compete. Google has the Search engine and now Android as well, i'd like to support their opposition in those markets. Microsoft wins my vote based on that, as long as what they provide works for me, which bing and Windows Phone do very well by me.

Why do they 'need' to choose Google in the first place? Google has their G+ thing which competes with Facebook so why give them a search advantage that Google has been lusting over ever since.

The only people who are going to be paying any attention to this are those of us who follow tech. People who follow tech know that all the major companies are not in it for the customer. Facebook, Microsoft, Google etc none of them are the good guys and they make themselves look stupid by trying to convince us all that they care.

As consumers we need to keep competition, and also make sure that we retain no loyalty as we get nothing for it. These companies should be working to keep us happy.

Considering facebook's privacy policies mean nothing and change like everyday, from that point of view that makes sense.
Also, from another point of view, google has always vowed to never remove anything from search results that was public at some point., because its not google's responsibility. THey get requests all the time.

Dale said,
I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that Microsoft owns shares in Facebook...

or the fact that Google has a competitor? aka G+?

neufuse said,

or the fact that Google has a competitor? aka G+?

I don't think G+ was around in 2007 when this agreement was first announced.

The reality is that MS is probably more trust worthy when it comes to privacy than Google. MS actually sells products to enterprises and businesses and if it lost its privacy credibility, those businesses would consider looking elsewhere for their software and now hardware products. Google on the other hand gets its revenue based primarily on gathering, compiling, and selling derived data based on their customer's habits and activities, and advertisement. If Facebook wants to be trusted by enterprises, as a foot hold into that market, it makes more sense to partner with Microsoft who for the most part already has a trusted relationship with them.

While both Google and Microsoft have incentives to not sell direct client data, Google would be the first to change their policies if their financial status was threatened. Microsoft would have a lot more to loose. Of course you could argue that because Google has most of its eggs in the advertising basket, if for some reason they would loose consumer confidence in privacy, they would have a lot to loose as well. Either way, its in the interest of all of these companies to not violate their user's privacy, but personally I think Google would be willing to do it first.

uh... sure they did? more like Facebook could control the data more with bing then google would let them aka google would get the same data and sell it so facebook couldn't make as much on it...

neufuse said,
uh... sure they did? more like Facebook could control the data more with bing then google would let them aka google would get the same data and sell it so facebook couldn't make as much on it...

Or it could just be as stated in the article, google wouldnt cooperate with FB's requests so they went with a search engine that would. But yeah, lets go with your reason.....

neufuse said,
uh... sure they did? more like Facebook could control the data more with bing then google would let them aka google would get the same data and sell it so facebook couldn't make as much on it...

Exactly. Knowing Facebook, privacy had nothing to do with it whatsoever...

M_Lyons10 said,

Exactly. Knowing Facebook, privacy had nothing to do with it whatsoever...

The fact they didn't go with Google shows privacy had something to do with their choice. If I ran a site I wouldn't want someone else selling my customers information.

Colin McGregor said,

If I ran a site I wouldn't want someone else selling my customers information.

More so when you are in the business of selling that information yourself.