Instagram says photos won't appear in ads

Instagram is demonstrated on an iPhone Monday, April 9, 2012, in New York. Facebook is spending $1 billion to buy the photo-sharing company Instagram in the social network's largest acquisition ever. Instagram lets people apply filters to photos they snap with their mobile devices and share them with friends and strangers. (AP Photo/Karly Domb Sadof) (AP Photo)

  BARBARA ORTUTAYSAN FRANCISCO -- Instagram, the popular mobile photo-sharing service now owned by Facebook, said Tuesday that it will remove language from its new terms of service suggesting that users' photos could appear in advertisements.

The language in question had appeared in updated policies announced Monday and scheduled to take effect Jan. 16. After an outcry on social media and privacy rights blogs, the company clarified that it has no plans to put users' photos in ads.

That said, Instagram maintains that it was created to become a business and would like to experiment with various forms of advertisements to make money. Instagram doesn't currently run any ads. As of now, the free service has no way to make money and brings in no revenue to Facebook.

"Our main goal is to avoid things likes advertising banners you see in other apps that would hurt the Instagram user experience," Instagram co-founder Kevin Systrom wrote in a blog post Tuesday.

What had riled users and privacy advocates was Instagram's new assertion that it may now receive payments from businesses to use its members' photos, user name and other data "in connection with paid or sponsored content or promotions, without any compensation" to them.

Instagram didn't offer many details at the time. Its blog post on Monday made no mention of ads or other commercial activities, though it offered links to the new privacy policy and terms of service. Those documents spell out what the service could do, but say little about actual plans.

Instead, Instagram merely said the changes will help its service "function more easily as part of Facebook by being able to share info between the two groups." Facebook Inc. also recently updated its privacy policy to allow for more integration with Instagram.

"This means we can do things like fight spam more effectively, detect system and reliability problems more quickly, and build better features for everyone by understanding how Instagram is used," the earlier blog post said, adding that the updates also "help protect you, and prevent spam and abuse as we grow."

Facebook bought Instagram in September for $715.3 million, $300 million of it in cash and the rest in stock.

Instagram's new policy, which takes effect Jan. 16, suggests that Facebook wants to integrate Instagram into its ad-serving system.

"These services are publicly advertised as 'free,' but the free label masks costs to privacy, which include the responsibility of monitoring how these companies sell data, and even how they change policies over time," said Chris Hoofnagle, director of Information Privacy Programs at the Berkeley Center for Law & Technology.

The fast-growing service has become a popular way to share photos from cellphones. The Instagram app, available for the iPhone and Android devices, offers a variety of filters to give photos a retro feel or other look. Although many other apps also offer filters for enhancing photos, they don't offer the sharing features and community aspects of Instagram.

Instagram has had a loyal following since before Facebook bought it. The purchase worried some of the earliest fans of the service, who feared Facebook would swallow up their beloved community.

Users must accept the new terms when they go into effect or leave the Instagram.

Twitter users were vowing to cancel their Instagram accounts. They complained that the new terms would essentially let the service sell people's photos for ads - something Instagram said Tuesday it doesn't plan to do.

Facebook's stock price increased nearly 4 percent on Tuesday amid the Instagram ads chatter, to close at $27.71.

LINK: NEW TERMS
LINK: CURRENT TERMS

---
Get Eyewitness News Delivered

Facebook | Twitter | Newsletters | Text Alerts

(Copyright ©2012 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.) Get more Lifestyle & Fun »

lifestyle & fun

View the original article here

President and First Lady to appear on 'The View'

  Eyewitness NewsNEW YORK (WABC) -- President Obama and first lady Michelle Obama will appear on ABC's "The View" Tuesday for their first joint interview on the daytime TV talk circuit, the show's producers announced today.

The first couple will together take questions on their relationship, family life inside the White House and the 2012 presidential race from the program's five female hosts.

The interview will be taped on Monday and will air Tuesday on Channel 7.

The Obamas have each appeared individually on "The View." Michelle Obama most recently visited the show in mid-August.

President Obama sat for a solo interview in July 2010, becoming the first sitting U.S. president to visit a daytime TV talk show.

"We are honored to host President Obama and first lady Michelle Obama," said co-host Barbara Walters in a statement. "This first joint appearance marks a significant milestone."

The taping is billed as part of the show's "Red, White & View" series, which has included prominent American politicians and discussions on current political issues.

Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, who has not yet appeared on "The View," said that he is willing to participate in an interview in October.

He had previously disparaged the program as a "high risk" media opportunity because of the "sharp tongued" female hosts.

No date has been publicly announced for a Romney visit to the program.

Hosts Barbara Walters, Whoopi Goldberg, Joy Behar, Elisabeth Hasselbeck and Sherri Shepherd - who represent a wide range of backgrounds and political views - are known for putting their guests on the hot seat.

The ladies' questions have not deterred the Obamas from coming back, however. Next week's appearance is Barack Obama's fifth visit to "The View," including previous appearances as a U.S. senator and presidential candidate. The first lady has been on the show four times, including a June 2008 stint as a special guest co-host.

---
GET MORE POLITICAL NEWS FROM EYEWITNESS NEWS AND ABC NEWS

---
Get Eyewitness News Delivered

Facebook | Twitter | Newsletters | Text Alerts

(Copyright ©2012 WABC-TV/DT. All Rights Reserved.) Get more Politics & Elections »

barack obama, joe biden, 2012 presidential election, mitt romney, paul ryan, politics & elections

View the original article here

Circumcision ban to appear on San Francisco ballot

  By ROBIN HINDERYSAN FRANCISCO -- A proposal to ban the circumcision of male children in San Francisco has been cleared to appear on the November ballot, setting the stage for the nation's first public vote on what has long been considered a private family matter.

But even in a city with a long-held reputation for pushing boundaries, the measure is drawing heavy fire. Opponents are lining up against it, saying a ban on a religious rite considered sacred by Jews and Muslims is a blatant violation of constitutional rights.

Elections officials confirmed Wednesday the initiative had qualified for the ballot with more than 7,700 valid signatures from city residents. Initiatives must have at least 7,168 names to qualify.

If the measure passes, circumcision would be prohibited among males under the age of 18. The practice would become a misdemeanor offense punishable by a fine of up to $1,000 or up to one year in jail. There would be no religious exemptions.

The proposed ban appears to be the first in the country to make it this far, though a larger national debate over the health benefits of circumcision has been going on for many years. Banning circumcision would almost certainly prompt a flurry of legal challenges alleging violations of the First Amendment's guarantee of the freedom to exercise one's religious beliefs.

Supporters of the ban say male circumcision is a form of genital mutilation that is unnecessary, extremely painful and even dangerous. They say parents should not be able to force the decision on their young child.

"Parents are really guardians, and guardians have to do what's in the best interest of the child. It's his body. It's his choice," said Lloyd Schofield, the measure's lead proponent and a longtime San Francisco resident. He added the cutting away of the foreskin from the penis is a more invasive medical procedure than many new parents or childless individuals realize.

But opponents say such claims are alarmingly misleading, and call the proposal a clear violation of constitutionally protected religious freedoms.

"For a city that's renowned for being progressive and open-minded, to even have to consider such an intolerant proposition ... it sets a dangerous precedent for all cities and states," said Rabbi Gil Yosef Leeds of Berkeley. Leeds is a certified "mohel," the person who traditionally performs ritual circumcisions in the Jewish faith.

He said for the past few months he has been receiving daily phone calls from members of the local Jewish community who are concerned about the proposed ban. But he said he is relatively confident that even if the measure is approved, it will be abruptly - and indefinitely - tied up in litigation.

Jews consider religious male circumcision a commandment from God. It also is widely practiced by Muslims, and while it does not appear in the Quran it is mentioned in the Sunnah, the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad. Most Christian denominations neither require nor forbid circumcision.

The initiative's backers say its progress is the biggest success story to date in a decades-old, nationwide movement by so-called "intactivists" to end circumcision of male infants in the United States. A similar effort by the Tarrytown, N.Y.-based group Intact America to introduce a circumcision ban in the Massachusetts Legislature last year failed to gain traction.

"It's been kind of under the radar until now, but it was a conversation that needed to happen," Schofield said of the debate over male circumcision. "We've tapped into a spark with our measure - something that's been going on for a long time."

Schofield's group calls its initiative the San Francisco Male Genital Mutilation bill, though he said the city attorney has opted to call the measure "Male Circumcision" on the ballot. The group's official website features a picture of a wide-eyed, delighted-looking baby and urges visitors to help "protect ALL infants and children in San Francisco from the pain and harm caused by forced genital cutting."

Female genital cutting, a controversial practice that usually involves the removal of the clitoris, is illegal in the United States. A circumcision ban would simply extend the same protections to males, Schofield said.

International health organizations have promoted circumcision as an important strategy for reducing the spread of the AIDS virus.

That's based on studies that showed it can prevent AIDS among heterosexual men in Africa.

But there hasn't been the same kind of push for circumcision in the U.S., in part because nearly 80 percent of American men are already circumcised, a much higher proportion than the worldwide average of 30 percent. Also, HIV spreads mainly among gay men in the U.S., and research indicates circumcision doesn't protect gay men from HIV.

For years, federal health officials have been working on recommendations regarding circumcision. The effort was sparked by studies that found circumcision is partially effective in preventing the virus' spread between women and men. The recommendations are still being developed, and there is no date set for their release, said a spokeswoman for the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The CDC doesn't have a position on the San Francisco proposal, said the spokeswoman, Elizabeth-Ann Chandler.

The chief of pediatric urology at the University of California, San Francisco Benioff Children's Hospital said he remains neutral on the subject of circumcision when parents come to him seeking advice. Dr. Laurence Baskin said he instead tries to educate them about the medical benefits and potential downsides of the procedure.

In addition to the AIDS studies, Baskin cited published research indicating that circumcision can reduce the incidence of other sexually transmitted diseases, as well as penile cancer and urinary tract infections. He disputed claims that circumcision is mutilation or causes significant pain.

"It has what I would say would be a minimal amount of pain if done properly, so my recommendation is to use anesthesia," he said. However, he noted, "most people aren't circumcised and they do just fine."

Baskin was not neutral on the subject of the new ballot measure, calling it "a bunch of nonsense."

"I'm not going to stop doing circumcisions, and this would never pass the First Amendment test," he said. "The people who are doing this should focus on our budget problems, lack of education - something that could really help society."

---
AP Medical Writer Mike Stobbe contributed to this report from Atlanta.

(Copyright ©2011 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.) Get more U.S. & World News »

u.s. & world news

View the original article here