Home > Identity Theft > Two Sure Things in Life: Death & Facebook

Comments 0 Comments

What happens to our Facebook profile when we die? Who gets to connect with us on LinkedIn, post pictures of us on Pinterest, or view our photos on Flickr after we have shuffled off this mortal coil and left these worlds — both the physical and the virtual — behind?

These are brand-new questions that privacy experts, social media companies, political leaders, and families and friends of the deceased are all grappling with. The answers do not come easily, and they are being made on an ad-hoc basis, as each website and each new group of grieving survivors struggles to decide the best way to handle this new reality: That our online lives have achieved a kind immortality for which we mortals have dreamed or dreaded since time immemorial.

There are no easy questions here. After someone dies, his online friends may want to post photos on his Facebook page that capture some of their best memories together. But some may include images of the deceased drinking, or in a nightclub, or doing any number of things that could prove emotionally damaging to surviving spouses, parents and children.

Another question: Does the deceased have any say in the matter? Our notions about privacy usually attend to the living. But now that fully-realized iterations of our personalities can outlive us online, now is the time to start modernizing our long-held definitions of privacy.

One could argue that the best way to protect privacy is to give family members control of a deceased person’s social media profiles, email accounts and other personal data online. Those relatives could decide whether to keep profiles as they are, restrict access only to family members, or to pull profiles down entirely. To me, family control makes a certain kind of sense.

On the other hand, friends and colleagues mourn, too. According to a recent study by psychiatrist Elaine Kasket (I trust I’m not the only one who sees the irony here), the ability to post photos and written testimonials to the deceased on social networking sites like Facebook can be important in helping friends deal with the loss. As long as those posts remain respectful, they could also help relatives better know the deceased and ease their process of mourning.

So far, the biggest actors in deciding these issues have been social networking sites themselves. Facebook allows family members to remove a deceased user’s profile entirely, or place it in “memorial state,” which removes status updates and restricts access to current friends, TIME reports. Flickr continues preferences made by the user when he was alive, including barring anyone from seeing photos marked private.

Some of these policies make sense, but I foresee problems. If a wife wants her dead husband’s Facebook profile taken down but his daughter wants it to remain active, how does Facebook decide? If a person has a personal and a professional Facebook profile, might different rules of access apply for each?

I don’t know the answers, and neither do Facebook, Twitter, or academics like Kaskett. But we need answers soon. Now that the majority of Americans have Facebook profiles, the question of post-mortem privacy soon will move from the periphery of the national consciousness to its very center. As I’ve written many times, the United States desperately needs a federal privacy policy that protects citizens’ identities across all mediums, from paper documents to online files. That policy must include strong security protocols across all crucial infrastructure and data systems, and rules for how victims should be notified after a data breach.

A national privacy policy also needs rules regarding what happens to our online profiles after we die. This policy won’t take shape overnight. As we saw with Congress’s disgraceful punting of the cybersecurity bill this summer, even common-sense, apolitical proposals morph into political footballs when the overgrown children in Washington decide it’s in their short-term partisan advantage.

That said, regardless of what our leaders (I use that term advisedly) do, or don’t do, we are still — and always will be — the ultimate guardians of our reputations and our identities. They are assets that are just as valuable, perhaps even more so, than our homes, our stocks and our bonds. We must build, nurture, manage and protect them with the same skill and vigilance that we demand of the professional money managers who run our investment portfolios, as I wrote about here. Our online personas are part of that basket of assets that must be intelligently managed so as not to put ourselves or our families at risk, even after we die.

Just as every adult should have a will detailing the distribution of their assets upon death, every will should include a section regarding the disposition of one’s online accounts. Do you want your Facebook profile shut down, or left in place? Do you want your Twitter feed shut off, or have you gained such a following and a track record of funny, insightful tweets that a trusted work colleague might well continue tweeting in your stead?

The bottom line — don’t wait for or delegate to Facebook or the government the protection of your reputation, they have neither the urgency nor the stake you do.

This story is an Op/Ed contribution to Credit.com and does not represent the views of the company or its affiliates.

Image: MoneyBlogNewz, via Flickr

Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

Certain credit cards and other financial products mentioned in this and other articles on Credit.com News & Advice may also be offered through Credit.com product pages, and Credit.com will be compensated if our users apply for and ultimately sign up for any of these cards or products. However, this relationship does not result in any preferential editorial treatment.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Our Owners

Credit.com is owned by Progrexion Holdings Inc. which is the owner and administrator of a number of business related to credit and credit repair, including CreditRepair.com, and eFolks. In addition, Progrexion also provides services to Lexington Law Firm as a third party provider. Despite being owned by Progrexion, it is not the role of the Credit.com editorial team to advocate the use of the company’s other services. In articles, reporters may mention credit repair as an option, for example, but we’ll also be sure to note the various alternatives to that service. Furthermore, you may see ads for credit repair services on Credit.com, but the editorial team isn’t responsible for the creation or implementation of those ads, anymore than reporters for the New York Times or Washington Post are responsible for the ads on their sites.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team