Eff, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, wrote that Facebook’s attack on Apple’s anti tracking measures is a ridiculous campaign, which is actually not conducive to the small businesses that the social network should try to protect. Facebook’s ongoing media campaign is trying to put pressure on apple to stop changing plans to limit the amount of advertising tracking that occurs throughout the apple ecosystem. < / P > < p > this three-dimensional online and offline offensive has been criticized by Apple CEO Tim Cook and the company itself. Now, eff, a privacy focused nonprofit, has stepped in and is on Apple’s side. In an article published on eff’s website on Friday, the group clarified that Facebook’s campaign consisted mainly of media blitz, claiming that Apple’s privacy change would be bad for small businesses, but it was actually the opposite. Eff said it was not privacy protection, but Facebook’s ridiculous attempt to divert users’ attention from their poor record of anti competitive behavior and privacy issues, and to undermine privacy initiatives that are detrimental to Facebook’s business. < / P > < p > Apple’s app tracking transparency feature in IOS 14 and iPad os14 has been praised by eff because it should be an obvious bottom line for & quot; to ask a tracker to obtain your consent before tracking you on the Internet;. By allowing users to choose which third-party trackers can or can’t work, this change & quot; helps protect users from abuse and allows them to make the best decisions for themselves & quot;. According to EFF, this feature is a step in the right direction to reduce the abuse of developers by letting users know and control their personal data. &On Facebook’s campaign against this feature, eff says it’s not about the interests of small businesses, but about who benefits from monitoring driven advertising normalization and what Facebook will lose if users learn more about what it and other data brokers are doing behind the scenes. &Quot; < / P > < p > targeted ads relying on trackers are considered to make more money than non targeted ads, but eff claims that the extra revenue does not reach content creators or app developers. The eff wrote: & quot; on the contrary, most of any additional money earned by targeted advertising ends up in the pockets of these data brokers. &Facebook and Google are two beneficiaries. < / P > < p > because & quot; a small number of companies control the online advertising market & quot;, eff says that small businesses cannot compete effectively, in part because the advertising industry itself is promoting the illusion that & quot; targeted advertising is superior to other ways to reach customers, which in turn reduces the value of non targeted advertising. < / P > < p > & quot; Facebook’s propaganda in this case that it is protecting small businesses is no different from the fact that & quot; eff alleges. &Facebook has locked them in a situation where they are forced to be furtive and not good for their customers. The answer is not to defend that broken system at the expense of the privacy and control of its users. &Finally, eff reiterated that transparency of APP tracking is a great step for apple;. &When a company does the right thing for its users, eff will stand with it, just as we will crack down on companies that do wrong. Here, apple is right, Facebook is wrong. "Global Tech