I think this would bother me a lot more if it affected every status update on Facebook, not just the check-ins. Of course, that could be the next step.

That said, I don’t look forward to having to look at all of these new ads on my newsfeed either.

I do wonder how they deal with negative comments. Say somebody checks in after having a bad experience. ‘Sally checked into XXXXX – ‘Ugh, I hate it here’. Not so great for the advertising then!

From the day I signed up (somewhat reluctantly, but many people I know were on Facebook and no other networking site) I’ve made it my policy not to “like” corporate entities. I “friend” people and “like” various non-profits, local civic organizations, etc.

Is that enough to keep me from showing up in a sponsored story? I don’t know. Perhaps I need to occasionally post a status update encouraging my friends to boycott any business that uses my name in their advertisements without my permission. That failing, one of these days I just might quit… have been thinking about it for a while now.

However, I fall into the ‘not caring’ category and that’s not because I don’t care about my privacy etc. (I can be very anti-facebook / pro-privacy at times) but simply that, as far as I can see, the only difference between the first red box (in the diagram above) and the second red box is the second has a logo (and, presumably, has been paid for – forgive me but I’m not up to speed on these sponsored stories yet). Presumably the positioning of the Sponsored Story too? My feeling is that simply by checking into somewhere you’re advertising for that brand anyway but they’re just not paying for it – but appreciate the fact that the brand’s not paying for that exposure then.

Interesting post though and has certainly got me thinking.

Cheers,
Phil.
ps – I’m a Foursquare guy, not Facebook places, so this wont affect me anyway :))