It generated controversies<\/a> and when Google+ followed suit it\u00a0even sparked\u00a0the “nymwars<\/a>” but overall it was a ballsy move that worked for a young company building a user base. People signed up because they knew they could share their lives just with their friends. The tactic was so successful, aided and abetted by the spread of Facebook\u2019s social sign-in to other services, that real names rapidly became the norm on the web.<\/p>\n Google also bases its social efforts, and supporting advertising business model, around real identities. At least in part because it has been quicker to monetize ads around users search and email, Google has faced more criticism for its data collection practices. During his time as CEO Eric Schmidt said online anonymity was dangerous<\/a>, but was at pains to stress that anonymity is not the same thing as privacy, which deserves to be protected. A European court ruled recently that Google shouldn\u2019t display search results which are deemed to be no longer relevant and could in fact damage a person\u2019s reputation, which will force it to make hard and messy decisions about where the line is drawn between individual privacy and the public interest.<\/p>\n Mark Zuckerberg now admits the pendulum may have swung too far. \u201cIf you\u2019re always under the pressure of real identity, I think that is somewhat of a burden,\u201d he told BusinessWeek<\/a> in an interview to mark Facebook\u2019s tenth birthday.<\/p>\n The simple narrative is that there has been a backlash amongst web users who don\u2019t want to trade their privacy for \u201cfree\u201d services. The revelations by Edward Snowden about state-sponsored surveillance cemented that view. The reality looks more complex however. If you look at the blunt metric of searches, we’re less interested in privacy than we have ever been.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/intercom.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/06\/Sign-ups.jpg\")
<\/div>\n