Recently, a new device and platform called Facedeals created quite a bit of Minority Report buzz. The product, designed by integrated advertising industry RedPepper, is a camera put into retailers that scans consumers faces, identifies their Facebook profiles, checks them in, and can then offer discounts.
The natural reaction here is to cry privacy infringements: Facebook’s face recognition feature has been criticized since its launch, and it’s clear that users aren’t quite comfortable with the technology yet. So it’s a given that RedPepper’s Facedeals has been met with quite a bit of privacy and identity fear-mongering.
RedPepper, which thinks of itself as “an ad agency by day and an invention lab by night,” says that it’s interested in “connecting the ‘face’ to Facebook.” The company’s CEO, Tim McMullen helped us answer some of the more pressing Facedeals questions.
Q: Is RedPepper working with Facebook on this project?
A: According to McMullen, while Facedeals is not affiliated with Facebook, the company is familiar with Facebook’s guidelines for a device like this. So while in the future it’s possible we could see this thing get off the ground with a little help with Facebook, at the moment the two are entirely independent.
Q: Would Facedeals be opt-in?
A: I can’t stress enough how very much the answer to this questions is “yes.” In order for Facedeals to scan and identify your likeness, you would need to download and install the app, and opt-in. McMullen also says that there’s a double opt-in step to make sure no one who doesn’t want to use Facedeals is.
Q: What happens with the images that Facedeals scans?
A: There was some hesitation when Facebook first launched its own face recognition technology that this meant we were heading toward a world where all you needed was a photo of someone, anyone, and that you could search and find identities by it. This made me ask RedPepper about what happens to the images that Facedeals is scanning and using. “Once a user has approved their likeness for matching purposes and it is stored in our database, we make no efforts to store additional information,” McMullen says. “We have no intention of selling the database to third parties.”
Q: Could this help Facebook Offers become the feature it just hasn’t managed to be yet?
A: Alright, this one isn’t very user-focused, but it’s still relevant. Facebook shut down Deals, only to relaunch the effort with Offers, but it’s been an area of struggle. McMullen points out that Facedeals will let retailers know, without question, what deals and offers are sticking and what isn’t. It also means patrons aren’t relying on hit or miss deal-a-day emails.
Q: When can we expect to see Facedeals in the flesh?
A: It’s in product development and beta testing right now, and I’m told to check back in September when the iPhone 5 is released. I also asked for some under-the-hood details on how precisely Facedeals connects with Facebook and reads user images, but I’m told to check back when testing has been finalized.
And there you have it. Ultimately, you can expect Facedeals to hit a store near you within the near future, and you can also rest easy knowing it’s opt-out and available via download only. It’s still admittedly a very futuristic piece of augmented reality, and as such, it’s going to take a lot of getting used to from consumers. Convincing the general population of its merits remains an uphill battle.
Stupid “journalistic’ comment of the day: “and you can also rest easy knowing it’s opt-out and available via download only” It will still scan every face it sees and check it against facebook (or some other database) – I seriously doubt it will only scan a db of opt-ins, in fact it’s stated otherwise. Serious, serious invasion, IMHO.
selling you a surveillance society — very, very cheaply I might add. This is outrageous.
@Donald, that doesn’t make sense. Why would they bother checking the faces they scan against EVERY FB profile? Firstly, not every FB profile has a scannable face associated with it, and secondly, why would they bother searching for faces that haven’t opted in with the app and therefore cannot be sent deals? It would just be a huge waste of processing power. It makes far more sense for them to just check the scanned faces against the database of opt-in faces. Stores already record you on camera and have done for decades, so what’s the problem, exactly? I think people just love getting all worked up and saying the phrase “invasion of privacy.”
They’ll be getting a lot of middle fingers is what they’ll be getting on that camera thingy……………
My initial reaction to Facedeals was very negative. I realized that most brick-and-mortar business records us visually every time we visit and that one kind of industry (cell phone companies) records our location data daily. But it bothered me that even one more business had the potential to record my location data. After reading this article, I’m relieved to learn that it will be an opt-in technology. Still, I have some concerns because there were some ambiguous phrases used to describe the technology. First, you have to opt-in for Facedeals to “scan and identify” your likeness. I assume this means that if I don’t opt-in and enter Facedeal’s database, they won’t be able to identify me and offer me a deal. But aren’t they still going to scan me and everyone else? Will they delete all scans that are unidentifiable or will they hold on to them to data mine them at some future date? Second, wasn’t reassured by the phrase “We have no intention…” Facedeals policy hasn’t closed any doors there.
I see one of those, it’s getting smashed, period.
I see one of those, it’s getting smashed, period.
yep!
@Donald, that doesn’t make sense. Why would they bother checking the faces they scan against EVERY FB profile? Firstly, not every FB profile has a scannable face associated with it, and secondly, why would they bother searching for faces that haven’t opted in with the app and therefore cannot be sent deals? It would just be a huge waste of processing power. It makes far more sense for them to just check the scanned faces against the database of opt-in faces. Stores already record you on camera and have done for decades, so what’s the problem, exactly? I think people just love getting all worked up and saying the phrase “invasion of privacy.”
At the time of writing this, two people have blindly liked, and one person has shared, a link that doesn’t work.
“Sorry. The page you are looking for does not exist or has moved.”