Facebook is used to share anything, let alone personal information..
Recently I posted how Facebook comments were insulting to women and Facebook found that it had no objection!
Judges from the Cour de Cassation ruled that the smartphone application, which allowed users to post a cocktail recipe directly to their walls with the message “You can get Ricard Mix recipes too on the Ricard Mix Codes app,” was ‘inopportune’.
They considered Facebook users logging on to find an advertisement from a friend would 1) Not recognise it as an advert because it was posted by someone they trust; 2) Be an unsuspecting recipient of advertising because all they thought they would find on Facebook was the usual fare you get on Facebook (boastful statements, endless photos of a pug/newborn baby/ holiday in Ibiza etc. etc.).
It’s not massively surprising that the July 3 ruling has gone unnoticed in France. The powers that be have a history of wrapping their public in cotton wool when it comes to advertising. What might be considered patronising and unnecessary in other countries is deemed basic protection here.
The most obvious example is television advertising, which has to be clearly labelled as such, meaning that each time programming cuts to a commercial break, an “advertising” jingle is played. Just in case you thought you were watching a one-minute “documentary” about why driving a BMW makes you feel like a real man… followed by a very short film about a really fascinating cleaning product.
I think it’s fair to say this attitude – which, strangely, hails back to the days when advertising was so forthright it would seem entirely unnecessary – is pretty outdated. Especially in a case when teenagers are the concern – which is what the judges insisted was their priority in their verdict against Pernod Ricard.