Conflicting information between FamilySearch (RootsTech) Video and Family Tree Policy
In an otherwise marvelous video titled "Your Memories Can Live Forever" from RootsTech 2022 [ https://www.familysearch.org/rootstech/session/your-memories-can-live-forever-on-familysearch ], there is a discussion beginning at approximately the 1:00 point of the video concerning making memories private. Then at about 1:32 in the video, the following graphic is shown:
Note that it specifically states that, "All added memories are public."
There really needs to be more clarification about what is private and what is public, and the ways that some memories can be accessed through various search engines, etc., so people are both fully informed and not confused by conflicting information. The statement made in the video at the 1:00 point really needs clarification!
-- Chris
Comments
-
The Private Memories feature became available in August 2020 - according to the FamilySearch blog:
@Chris Bieneman Schmink The video you reference shows posted date - Feb 28, 2022.
I think by default all Memories are Public - you have to select to make them Private - I think that is the only difference. Here is a lengthy FamilySearch Memories blog from 27 May 2022 - which also mentions making Memories Private:
I have not found that anyone goes back and makes corrections/updates to previous blog posts. But subsequent posts may override previous ones. I have seen that some posts are retired/replaced. Viewing of videos from the past - which include prior interface - may not apply to the current interface.
0 -
Unfortunately, it's still ambiguous. The video I referenced was just sent out for use in a widely distributed email from FamilySearch only two weeks ago. And the video itself was vetted for use as part of RootsTech, earlier this year. The privacy policy option you referenced was in 2020, two years ago. There are some subtle issues with privacy of which many who post into the Family Tree are not fully aware to. So my suggestion still stands - it would be very helpful for someone with some authority in FamilySearch, with full knowledge, to create an article about what can be found publicly, and what cannot (and how we can personally ensure that).
Just one example is photo memories. If a person has a large family photo such as a 3-generation family group (or in a few cases, even four generations), some of those people will be deceased, but many of them may still be alive. And if either the title of the photo is searched, or just a specific individual in that photo who happens to be deceased, that can be found. And then by deduction, it may be that certain of the living people in the photo (whose identifiable named tags do not show up in the searched photo) can still by process of elimination or deduction be identified. That's just one example.
There is more information that still needs clarification on this topic, and we need to be careful about giving definitive answers in this kind of forum when we're not employed within the FamilySearch organization, with responsibilities specific to the topic being discussed. I happen to be a FamilySearch missionary (not the kind you talk to when you call FamilySearch Support), and have access to a number of resources that many do not easily have. I'm still very cautious about what I say is true (or policy), because I don't have full knowledge of any of it, and try to base my answers on what I've gotten directly from someone with the authority to make such pronouncements.
Just my 2¢. 😎
--Chris
1 -
Disclaimer: I made no claim of being definitive in my response to your public Community post. I do not work for FamilySearch.
In my previous reply I used FamilySearch articles and links to explain that the video you are questioning was published Feb 2022. I knew nothing about a recent email from FamilySearch two weeks ago including a reference to that video. - but upon checking my email today I do see that email.
If you add a Memory today in FamilySearch the interface notice still displays as:
FamilySearch Community> Suggest an Idea is a public forum. So perhaps if you are wanting a definitive reply from a FamilySearch representative - there should be another location other than public Community> Suggest an Idea - that your resources can get you in contact with? I am puzzled why you would post to the public Suggest an Idea forum - if you wanted a 'private/definitive' response which your resources should be able to provide? I agree - if a user would like a 'definitive reply' from FamilySearch - there should be a dedicated location to submit those queries - getting in contact with someone that can definitively answer will most likely be a chore. The Feedback link on the Rootstech video - https://www.familysearch.org/rootstech/session/your-memories-can-live-forever-on-familysearch - should submit the Feedback to Rootstech - not here in Suggest an Idea. I went ahead and submitted that feedback referencing this discussion - let's see where it ends up.
As far as what policy is for photos that could possibly reveal identifying information of living people - if you read the Submission Agreement - #6. Sensitivity to Other Users and #7. Automated Screening - provides FamilySearch broad latitude for removal of anything they deem removable.
So I would suspect if someone did upload something potentially identifying a living person without their consent and a living person complained about that content - FamilySearch would remove it. Beyond this the automated screening process remains behind the wall - FamilySearch can remove anything it deems through their processes and are not required to give a reason. I would suspect if there are photos containing living people of whom even some are tagged perhaps FamilySearch will come up with a process/feature(s) such that those living persons could provide consent to the photo being shared. This type of Idea would require the reverse of the current process - photos being Private by default, document consent, then allow it to be marked Public - or at least shared with Friends or Family Groups.
As far as ensuring that Private Memories are indeed not discoverable once in the cloud - I have no way of knowing. As a general rule - anything you upload to the Internet is discoverable by someone. The almost daily reports of hacks of websites/databases reflect this. The fact that you have to select to change the default Public setting to Private (only you can see this memory) - should be enough to make one question whether it is discoverable.
FamilySearch Help Center article:
All the information I have replied with is publicly available on FamilySearch - I don't know how much more careful I can be but to refer to FamilySearch's own public documents/interface.
0 -
@genthusiast First, I intended no inference that you were making definitive claims. I merely made my own statement about my own personal policy when commenting in these Community Groups forums, and do my best to keep to that personal position.
Second, why I received an obvious mass email from FamilySearch I have no idea. The simple fact is that I did receive it, it was directly from FamilySearch, and therefore could be considered at least somewhat authoritative and up to date. Though it should always be understood that some blog posts and help articles still exist as originally posted despite being out of date and/or superseded by later announcements. But because of the almost immediate recency of the email, I included it in this discussion for people to use as they make their own decisions - the more information, generally the better. The email was received 23 October 2022, and had the subject line: "Preserving Memories to Preserve Your Family’s Legacy."
At the bottom it stated: "This email was sent by: FamilySearch," that it is "A service provided by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints," and that I was "receiving this email because you created a FamilySearch account or used a FamilySearch tool or service."
I have no idea why you would not have gotten the same email. I know I do get some emails because of a specific calling in the Church that pertains to family history, and I also get separate emails that are generally sent only to FamilySearch missionaries and employees, but they go to my familysearch.org email account - this one came to my original registered FamilySearch email address.
You added the blue-shaded statement that I had added in my original post, where I had already noted that it came from the nearly brand new email sent by Familysearch (or at least the video they included as a reference for their intended audience). So the fact that, "the interface notice still displays" as shown doesn't surprise me at all. And that was the whole reason for my original question posted at the top through the "Feedback" option on most FamilySearch pages.
Your suggestion that, "there should be a dedicated location to submit those queries," is something I actually DID with my original post published above. Supposedly that's exactly what the "Feedback" option is for on FamilySearch, and it's even been recommended at times by FamilySearch Support representative on the phone. So this forum supposedly is that feature, even though it clearly doesn't get a quick (let alone definitive) response from the people I'd hoped would look into it and respond. But that just points out the fact that FamilySearch International is a massive organization, doing an overall spectacular job with what they do, while at the same time experiencing some of the same things that any very large bureaucracy experiences. And sometimes that results in understandable inefficiencies in terms of updating, clarification, removal of out-of-date things, etc. And therefore "definitive" answers aren't always immediately available (and are still subject to change as things change in the future, or occasional mistakes are discovered). If anyone remembers "New FamilySearch" from a decade or so back, that was one big (and sometimes painful) example. It's all part of the frustration that becomes part of any large bureaucracy where various groups are working on this or that, sometimes they overlap with each other without realizing that area(s) of overlap, policies are developed, and sometimes those policies conflict. If we want perfection, I think that comes after this life. 😁
I did finally write to someone at the very top of FamilySearch early this year about some significant questions that just weren't being answered anywhere that I could find, even in forums I have available to me as a result of my Church calling as well as the FamilySearch mission I'm currently serving, and I received a very detailed and very helpful response with permission to post it in the Community. In it, the person stated that some issues had not been entirely worked out that actually pertained to privacy, and were under discussion. Since then another user posted an even later help article months after the email from the individual I had written, and that help article contained a definitive statement that apparently updates what the top level person had said had not yet been decided several months earlier. So perhaps it finally was decided.
Much is always going to be in a state of change with new ideas, new needs, new previously unstated questions, etc. But the progress will (almost) always be forward thinking with the intent of improvement. As for me, I think I'm going to bow out of this discussion at this point, as I have no further information that would be definitive on the subject, and don't want to cause any confusion on the part of others.
--Chris
1
