Kakao Talk Data Changes Enrage Netizens — But Is It Much Ado About Nothing?

by Niels on September 13, 2011

  • Share on Tumblr
  • Sharebar
  • Share on Tumblr

Mega-popular messenger service Kakao Talk recently implemented changes to its data collection policies. And in true Google+ style, they told people unwilling to sign up that they could take their custom elsewhere.

In its announcement last week, Kakao Talk — used by some 18 million people in Korea and another 4 million or so worldwide — said that as well as collecting the user’s phone number, third-party phone numbers stored on the phone, the device’s serial number and info on legal guardians of users aged 14 or under, the company would now require users to submit their email address, too. All this is in addition to users’ Kakao Talk name and ID, their photo, the times they used Kakao Talk and all the services they accessed when they did so.

According to the Daum story, Kakao Talk said that anyone declining the new terms would no longer be able to use the service. To make sure nobody missed the point, Kakao Talk went on to say that refuseniks would have all their data deleted from Kakao, and they would thenceforth be unable to chat with their friends on the service.

Unsurprisingly, Kakao Talk’s abrupt tone endeared them to no one. In a sentiment widely echoed on Twitter, 28-year-old Han Mo fumed:

SK Comms recently leaked personal information, so when Kakao Talk insists on gathering similar data against such a sensitive backdrop, it’s clearly a problem. Above all, just like the big drawback they’d suffer if they deleted my account, I’ve decided to respond to this appalling news by leaving Kakao Talk.

This is not the first time Kakao has attempted to gather user info in a rather peremptory fashion. Last October, according to the Daum piece, the company quietly changed its policy in order to collect real names, ID numbers and email addresses from members who agreed to disclose this information. Such was the outcry that Kakao boss Lee Jae-beom felt compelled to issue an official apology on the company’s blog.

However, writing on his blog Inside Social Web, the ever insightful Kim Taehyun questioned whether Kakao Talk’s sins were more of presentation than substance. (Full disclosure: Kim is a partner of TMN, of which Nanoomi.net is also a part. I’m a sometime contributor to Nanoomi.)

Citing previous Kakao Talk guidelines on data gathering (which you can see on his blog), Kim says that for all the bellyaching on Twitter, most of the “changes” have in fact been in place since at least last October. The one key alteration, he says, is the email requirement, which is intended as a means of verifying users’ identity. Kim says that Kakao Talk is pushing ahead with new services aimed at competing with top players in the industry, and email addresses are apparently an essential part of this.

In the worldview of developers, Kim continues, email addresses are a very basic element of online services, and so Kakao Talk’s staff no doubt believed their “request” would cause scarcely a ripple of protest. This is especially true given that Naver and Daum — Korea’s portal giants and operators of key Kakao competitors Naver Talk and My People — require users to submit both their real names and their ID numbers.

In addition, according to Kim’s analysis, Kakao Talk’s data gathering and privacy policies are broadly similar to those of US messenger service What’s App?:

So, why did Kakao’s comparatively innocuous request cause such a firestorm?

To Kim, Kakao Talk were simply guilty of dreadful PR. Instances abound of cack-handed efforts by the likes of Facebook and Google to alter privacy rules without anticipating the response, with some mess-ups caused by a deeply held belief that the company was actually doing users a favour. In a podcast interview I heard recently, Douglas Edwards, Google’s “employee No. 59,” said that when the company was working on its ill-starred Buzz service, Google’s engineers really believed that they were helping users out by automatically connecting them with everyone from their email archive. How, they figured, could anyone possibly object to such a convenient, time-saving initiative?

Korea has seen its share of privacy blunders, so I could certainly believe that Kakao’s move was born of inexperience rather than more nefarious motives. If anyone disagrees, please feel free to leave your thoughts below.

  • http://www.seoultaste.com Aaron Namba

    I’m guessing there was no malice involved, and certainly they are not doing any worse than other competing messaging services.

    But, as you alluded to, the circumstances are the problem.

    1) KakaoTalk is looking for a revenue stream. Any revenue stream. In this situation, collecting contact information will raise eyebrows.
    2) The recent SK data leak is still fresh in people’s minds, and if Kakao Talk wants to collect personal information, they need to prove that they can safeguard said information. However, due to #1, it is questionable whether they have the resources to do this.

  • http://twitter.com/NielsFootman Niels Footman

    Thanks for the comments, Aaron.

    I’m not sure how much I agree with your first point — all services like this, not just Kakao Talk, have constantly got an eye on revenue streams, and surely none of them would collect email addresses for any other purpose than to make money somehow. 

    However, I think your second point is absolutely spot on. Kakao has evidently struggled to cope with its explosive growth, and I think users would justifiably have major concerns about its ability to safeguard private information. After all, if one of the biggest portals/SNS sites in the country can’t keep personal data secure, why would Kakao be able to?

  • http://twitter.com/Kowiana Andy

    So if I don’t update my Kakao Talk can I keep using it as is? Or will it eventually be disabled? I barely use it to be honest.

  • http://twitter.com/NielsFootman Niels Footman

    Hi Andy

    I don’t know — I’m still without a phone back here in the homeland.

    As a matter of interest, why don’t you use it much? Pretty much everyone I know in Korea does…

Previous post:

Next post: